Institute of Social Sciences, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Hist Philos Life Sci. 2022 May 18;44(2):21. doi: 10.1007/s40656-022-00496-w.
Since the emergence of in-vitro fertilization (IVF), a specific set of technologies has been developed to address the problem of the 'biological clock'. The medical extension of fertility time is accompanied by promissory narratives to help women synchronize conflicting biological and social temporalities. This possibility also has a transgressive potential by blurring one of the biological landmarks - the menopause - by which reproductive lives are organized and governed. These new ways of managing, measuring and controlling reproductive time have renewed debates on the age limits of motherhood and the moral legitimacy of medical intervention into age-related fertility decline. Building on Amir's feminist concept of biotemporality, this paper questions what happens when the ontological foundations of age-limited motherhood are disrupted by technologies which allow fertility to be extended. It discusses the reconfigurations of the ontological boundaries of the facts of life in the light of literature on reproductive technologies and temporality. Through the Swiss experience, the paper shows how medical experts are drawn into negotiating the ontological boundaries of age-limited motherhood along the binaries of the normal/pathological and the biological/social. Questioning the purpose of medical interventions in what are seen as facts of life, they produce different configurations of moral reasoning where what is natural undergoes shifts which both reinforce the normative order and subvert it.
自从体外受精 (IVF) 出现以来,已经开发出了一套特定的技术来解决“生物钟”的问题。生育时间的医学延长伴随着承诺的叙述,以帮助女性协调冲突的生物和社会时间性。这种可能性也具有越轨的潜力,因为它模糊了其中一个生物标志——更年期,而更年期是生殖生活组织和管理的标志。这些管理、衡量和控制生殖时间的新方法重新引发了关于生育年龄限制和医学干预与年龄相关的生育能力下降的道德合法性的争论。本文以 Amir 的女性主义生物时间性概念为基础,质疑当限制生育年龄的本体论基础被允许生育延长的技术所打破时会发生什么。它根据生殖技术和时间性方面的文献,讨论了生活事实的本体论边界的重新配置。通过瑞士的经验,本文展示了医疗专家如何沿着正常/病理和生物/社会的二分法,在限制生育年龄的本体论边界上进行谈判。他们对被视为生活事实的医学干预的目的提出质疑,在这些医学干预中,产生了不同的道德推理配置,其中自然的东西发生了变化,既加强了规范秩序,又颠覆了规范秩序。