• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Bioethics, children, and the environment.生物伦理学、儿童与环境。
Bioethics. 2018 Jan;32(1):3-9. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12386. Epub 2017 Sep 5.
2
Queer reproduction revisited and why race, class and citizenship still matters: A response to Cristina Richie.再探酷儿生殖以及为何种族、阶级和公民身份仍至关重要:对克里斯蒂娜·里奇的回应
Bioethics. 2018 Feb;32(2):138-144. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12416. Epub 2017 Dec 7.
3
The Time Is Now: Bioethics and LGBT Issues.现在是时候了:生物伦理学与 LGBT 问题。
Hastings Cent Rep. 2014 Sep;44 Suppl 4:S2-3. doi: 10.1002/hast.361.
4
Repaving the Road of Good Intentions: LGBT Health Care and the Queer Bioethical Lens.重铺善意之路:LGBT 医疗保健与酷儿生物伦理视角。
Hastings Cent Rep. 2014 Sep;44 Suppl 4:S56-65. doi: 10.1002/hast.373.
5
Lessons from Queer Bioethics: A Response to Timothy F. Murphy.酷儿生物伦理学的教训:对蒂莫西·F·墨菲的回应
Bioethics. 2016 Jun;30(5):365-71. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12246. Epub 2016 Feb 1.
6
The meaning of synthetic gametes for gay and lesbian people and bioethics too.合成配子对同性恋者以及生物伦理学的意义。
J Med Ethics. 2014 Nov;40(11):762-5. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2013-101699. Epub 2014 Jan 31.
7
Dermatologic care of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community of India.印度女同性恋、男同性恋、双性恋和跨性别群体的皮肤科护理。
Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 2023 May-Jun;89(3):416-420. doi: 10.25259/IJDVL_687_20.
8
Older lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and intersex peoples' experiences and perceptions of receiving home care services in the community: A systematic review.老年男女同性恋、双性恋、变性者、酷儿和双性人在社区中接受家庭护理服务的体验和看法:系统评价。
Int J Nurs Stud. 2021 Jun;118:103907. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2021.103907. Epub 2021 Feb 25.
9
The importance of health(ism): A focus group study of lesbian, gay, bisexual, pansexual, queer and transgender individuals' understandings of health.健康主义的重要性:一项关于女同性恋、男同性恋、双性恋、泛性恋、酷儿和跨性别者对健康理解的焦点小组研究。
J Health Psychol. 2017 Feb;22(2):237-247. doi: 10.1177/1359105315600236. Epub 2016 Jul 11.
10
Harassment disparities and risk profile within lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Spanish adult population: Comparisons by age, gender identity, sexual orientation, and perpetration context.骚扰差异和西班牙成年男女同性恋、双性恋和跨性别者群体的风险特征:按年龄、性别认同、性取向和施害情境进行比较。
Front Public Health. 2022 Dec 15;10:1045714. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.1045714. eCollection 2022.

引用本文的文献

1
Parental Identity and Lived Experiences when Parenting a LGBTQIA+2 Child: A Critical Narrative Synthesis of Current Evidence.养育 LGBTQIA+2 子女的父母身份认同和生活体验:当前证据的批判性叙事综合。
Int J Qual Stud Health Well-being. 2024 Dec;19(1):2378511. doi: 10.1080/17482631.2024.2378511. Epub 2024 Jul 14.
2
Options for Fertility Treatments for Trans Women in Germany.德国跨性别女性的生育治疗选择。
J Clin Med. 2019 May 22;8(5):730. doi: 10.3390/jcm8050730.

本文引用的文献

1
What Justifies a Future with Humans in It?怎样的未来才适合人类存在?
Bioethics. 2016 Nov;30(9):751-758. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12290. Epub 2016 Sep 26.
2
Lessons from Queer Bioethics: A Response to Timothy F. Murphy.酷儿生物伦理学的教训:对蒂莫西·F·墨菲的回应
Bioethics. 2016 Jun;30(5):365-71. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12246. Epub 2016 Feb 1.
3
Access to fertility services by transgender persons: an Ethics Committee opinion.跨性别者获得生育服务:伦理委员会意见
Fertil Steril. 2015 Nov;104(5):1111-5. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.08.021. Epub 2015 Sep 9.
4
Against withdrawing government and insurance subsidies for ARTs from fertile people, with special reference to lesbian and gay individuals.反对取消政府和保险对有生育能力者(特别是女同性恋者和男同性恋者)辅助生殖技术的补贴。
J Med Ethics. 2015 May;41(5):388-90. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2014-102507. Epub 2015 Feb 5.
5
Assisted Gestation and Transgender Women.辅助生殖与跨性别女性
Bioethics. 2015 Jul;29(6):389-97. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12132. Epub 2014 Dec 17.
6
What would an environmentally sustainable reproductive technology industry look like?一个环境可持续的生殖技术产业会是什么样子?
J Med Ethics. 2015 May;41(5):383-7. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2013-101716. Epub 2014 Jul 24.
7
The meaning of synthetic gametes for gay and lesbian people and bioethics too.合成配子对同性恋者以及生物伦理学的意义。
J Med Ethics. 2014 Nov;40(11):762-5. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2013-101699. Epub 2014 Jan 31.
8
Queering the fertility clinic.使生育诊所变得奇特化。
J Med Humanit. 2013 Jun;34(2):227-39. doi: 10.1007/s10912-013-9210-3.
9
Entitlement to cloning.克隆的权利。
Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 1999 Summer;8(3):364-8.

生物伦理学、儿童与环境。

Bioethics, children, and the environment.

作者信息

Murphy Timothy F

出版信息

Bioethics. 2018 Jan;32(1):3-9. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12386. Epub 2017 Sep 5.

DOI:10.1111/bioe.12386
PMID:28873213
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5763367/
Abstract

Queer perspectives have typically emerged from sexual minorities as a way of repudiating flawed views of sexuality, mischaracterized relationships, and objectionable social treatment of people with atypical sexuality or gender expression. In this vein, one commentator offers a queer critique of the conceptualization of children in regard to their value for people's identities and relationships. According to this account, children are morally problematic given the values that make them desirable, their displacement of other beings and things entitled to moral protection, not to mention the damaging environmental effects that follow in the wake of population growth. Objectionable views of children are said even to have colonized the view of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and trans (LGBT) people who - with the enthusiastic endorsement of bioethics - increasingly turn to assisted reproductive treatments to have children. In the face of these outcomes, it is better - according to this account - that people reconsider their interest in children. This account is not, however, ultimately strong enough to override people's interest in having children, relative to the benefits they confer and relative to the benefits conferred on children themselves. It is certainly not strong enough to justify differential treatment of LGBT people in matters of assisted reproductive treatments. Environmental threats in the wake of population growth might be managed in ways other than devaluing children as such. Moreover, this account ultimately damages the interests of LGBT people in matters of access, equity, and children, which outcome is paradoxical, given the origins of queer perspectives as efforts to assert and defend the social interests of sexual and gender minorities.

摘要

酷儿视角通常由性少数群体提出,作为一种驳斥关于性取向的错误观点、对关系的错误描述以及对非典型性取向或性别表达者令人反感的社会对待方式的途径。在这方面,一位评论家对儿童概念化提出了酷儿批判,涉及儿童对于人们身份认同和人际关系的价值。根据这种观点,鉴于使儿童变得 desirable 的那些价值、他们对其他有权获得道德保护的生物和事物的取代,更不用说人口增长带来的破坏性环境影响,儿童在道德上是有问题的。甚至有人说,对儿童的令人反感的观点已经渗透到女同性恋、男同性恋、双性恋和跨性别者(LGBT)的观念中,他们在生物伦理学的热情支持下,越来越多地求助于辅助生殖治疗来生育孩子。面对这些结果,按照这种观点,人们最好重新考虑他们对孩子的兴趣。然而,相对于孩子所带来的益处以及带给孩子自身的益处而言,这种观点最终并不足以强大到能够压倒人们想要孩子的兴趣。它肯定也不足以成为在辅助生殖治疗问题上对 LGBT 人群区别对待的正当理由。人口增长带来的环境威胁或许可以通过其他方式来应对,而不是贬低儿童本身。此外,这种观点最终损害了 LGBT 人群在获得机会、公平以及孩子方面的利益,考虑到酷儿视角最初是为了维护和捍卫性少数群体及性别少数群体的社会利益,这样的结果是自相矛盾的。 (注:“desirable”在文中结合语境推测可能是指因某些价值观念使得孩子在特定视角下变得“有价值”之类的意思,但单独这样翻译在语义上不太完整准确,只是为了尽量保持原文意思完整呈现。)