Murphy Timothy F
Bioethics. 1995 Oct;9(5):380-98. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8519.1995.tb00313.x.
The motives and consequences of harvesting sperm from brain dead males for the purpose of effecting post mortem fatherhood are examined. I argue that sperm harvesting and post mortem fatherhood raise no harms of a magnitude that would justify forbidding the practice outright. Dead men are not obviously harmed by the practice; children need not be harmed by this kind of birth; and the practice enlarges rather than diminishes the reproductive choices of surviving partners. Certain ethical and legal issues nevertheless require attention. As a matter of consistency with other harvesting protocols, there ought to be a mechanism for respecting the wishes of men who when alive do not wish to become fathers post mortem. Mechanisms governing entitlement to harvest and use sperm will also be required. I note that the law is unlikely to recognize the paternity of children born from harvested sperm, though there may be reasons to recognize that paternity in some instances.
本文探讨了从脑死亡男性身上获取精子以实现死后成为父亲这一行为的动机和后果。我认为，获取精子和死后成为父亲所带来的危害程度并不足以直接禁止这种做法。死者显然不会因这种做法而受到伤害；通过这种方式出生的孩子不一定会受到伤害；而且这种做法扩大而非减少了在世伴侣的生育选择。然而，某些伦理和法律问题仍需关注。为了与其他获取程序保持一致，应该有一种机制来尊重那些生前不希望死后成为父亲的男性的意愿。还需要制定关于获取和使用精子的权利的管理机制。我指出，法律不太可能承认通过获取的精子所生孩子的父亲身份，不过在某些情况下可能有理由承认这种父子关系。
