Markets, Subsidies, Regulation and Trust: Building Ethical Understandings into the Market for Fertility Services
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This article uses the example of an Australian fertility clinic's efforts to recruit sperm donors from Canada to explore the issue of how ethical understandings can be built into market infrastructures. Australian fertility clinics lack sufficient sperm donors to meet current demand in part because of two ethical principles built into Australian law: a ban on payment for gametes and an insistence that sperm donor identity be available to the resulting child when the child reaches an appropriate age. The ethics oversight committee in New South Wales was willing to relax the first principle to permit the payment of substantial expenses to Canadian donors in order to uphold the second principle of mandatory identity disclosure. While it is still unclear whether these efforts will succeed in recruiting many donors, this article treats these practices as a case study in the creation of ethical understandings pertaining to the use of new technologies. Fertility services have been expanding as part of a global market in which the infertile can comparison shop on the internet, and arrange delivery of sperm through overnight express. At the same time, the use of such services is subject to a welter of conflicting, and often religiously driven, regulations. Under what circumstances are the resulting markets likely to lock in ethical norms, and under what circumstances are they likely to develop in accordance with the lowest common denominator of consumer preferences? This article identities four axes to examine in determining the efficacy of efforts to instill new ethical understandings. The first regulatory decision is the one to permit or ban the enterprise. We consider the circumstances in which bans are most likely to create unregulated underground markets that produce wholesale circumvention of the prohibition. The second is comparative regulation. Is regulation of the still nascent fertility industry engaged in a competition in laxity in which the jurisdiction that creates the most favorable regulatory environment captures the lion's share of the business? The third factor is subsidization. Access to subsidized health cares services is likely to persuade many to stay in their home countries if there is any possibility of securing services there. Finally, we consider the role of trust in facilitating acceptance of new norms. Canadians, for example, may be more comfortable than Australians with identity disclosure if they have greater confidence, if only because of distance, that the child will not show up on their doorsteps.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».