Tarasenko-Struc Aleksy
Seton Hall University, South Orange, NJ, USA.
J Bioeth Inq. 2024 Dec;21(4):735-749. doi: 10.1007/s11673-024-10350-2. Epub 2024 Jul 5.
I defend a novel account of the wrong of subjecting people to non-consensual sterilization (NCS), particularly in the context of the state-sponsored eugenics programmes once prevalent in the United States. What makes the eugenicist practice of NCS distinctively wrong, I claim, is its dehumanizing core: the fact that it is tantamount to treating people as nonhuman animals, thereby expressing the degrading social meaning that they have the value of animals. The practice of NCS is prima facie seriously wrong partly, but crucially, on these grounds. I consider and reject accounts of the wrong of NCS that make no reference to its animalizing character, such as that it violates victims' (procreative) autonomy, amounts to treating them merely as a means, inflicts psychological harm on them, or constitutes an affront to their human dignity. My discussion suggests that the critical vocabulary of bioethics should be expanded beyond talk of rights violations, benefits and harms, and equal treatment-and that the language of dehumanization is indispensable to bioethicists.
我为一种关于非自愿绝育(NCS)之错误的新观点进行辩护,尤其是在美国曾经盛行的国家支持的优生学计划背景下。我认为,优生学的非自愿绝育行为之所以特别错误,其核心在于它的非人化:即它等同于将人当作非人类动物来对待,从而表达了一种贬低性的社会意义,即他们具有动物的价值。基于这些理由,非自愿绝育行为表面上严重错误,部分但关键在于此。我考量并拒绝了那些未提及非自愿绝育行为兽化特征的关于其错误性的观点,比如它侵犯了受害者的(生育)自主权、等同于仅仅将他们当作手段、对他们造成心理伤害,或者构成对他们人类尊严的冒犯。我的讨论表明,生物伦理学的批判性词汇应该超越对权利侵犯、利益与伤害以及平等对待的讨论而得到扩展——而且非人化的语言对生物伦理学家来说是不可或缺的。