Women most fully experience the consequences of human reproductive technologies. Men who convene to evaluate such technologies discuss Itthem q: the women who must accept, avoid, or even resist these technologies; the women who consume technologies they did not devise; the women who are the objects of policies made by of women is neither sought nor listened to. The men. So often the input and perspectives that women bring to the privileged insights consideration of technologies in human reproduction are the subject of these volumes, which constitute the revised and edited record of a Workshop on qEthical Issues in Human Reproduction Technology: Analysis by W omenq (EIR TAW), held in June, 1979, at Hampshire College in Amherst, Massachusetts. Some 80 members of the workshop, 90 percent of them women (from 24 states), represented diverse occupations and personal histories, different races and classes, varied political commitments. They included doctors, nurses, and scientists, lay midwives, consumer advocates, historians, and sociologists, lawyers, policy analysts, and ethicists. Each session, however, made plain that ethics is an everyday concern for women in general, as well as an academic profession for some.We want them to get good medical care, but not unnecessary surgery and frequent, painful physical examinations and tests. ... Only when we determine to answer all these questions at once will new answers emerge. ... EFM When Needed How can we provide the option of electronic fetal monitoring for the few women whose babies will truly benefit from it, without making it routine for all women?
|Title||:||Birth Control and Controlling Birth|
|Author||:||Helen B. Holmes, Betty B. Hoskins, Michael Gross|
|Publisher||:||Springer Science & Business Media - 2012-12-06|