Kingma Elselijn
Department of Philosophy, University of Southampton Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Southampton, UK
Department of Industrial Engineering and Innovation Sciences, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, Netherlands.
J Med Ethics. 2020 Sep 8. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2020-106630.
Ectogestation-that is, 'artificial' or extramammalian pregnancy-may soon be within technological reach. This confronts us with questions about the correct moral and legal attitude towards the subjects of this technology, which are called 'gestatelings'. Colgrove argues that gestatelings are a kind of newborn, and consequently should have the same moral and legal protections as newborns. This paper responds that both claims are unsupported by his arguments, which equivocate on two understandings of the term 'newborn'. Questions about the appropriate moral and legal status of gestatelings are therefore (once again, and correctly) left unanswered, but in the course of attempting to answer them, we are well advised to continue using the term gestateling.
体外妊娠——也就是“人工”妊娠或非哺乳动物体内的妊娠——可能很快就能通过技术实现。这使我们面临关于对这项技术的对象（即所谓的“妊娠体”）应持何种正确道德和法律态度的问题。科尔格罗夫认为妊娠体是一种新生儿，因此应该享有与新生儿相同的道德和法律保护。本文回应称，这两种说法都没有得到他的论证支持，他在对“新生儿”一词的两种理解上含糊其辞。因此，关于妊娠体适当的道德和法律地位的问题（再次且正确地）未得到解答，但在试图回答这些问题的过程中，我们最好继续使用“妊娠体”这个术语。
