New England Journal Sounds Off on Paying Egg Donors
New England Journal discusses the issues associated with egg donation in light of the lovely situation with recruiting egg donors in Korea. AMBI's own Bonnie Steinbock has the right answer:
Some bioethicists argue that egg donors should be compensated — on the basis of the time and discomfort associated with the process, not the number and quality of the eggs that are produced. According to Bonnie Steinbock, a professor of philosophy at the State University of New York at Albany who has studied egg donation, in the absence of a consensus that no egg donor should be compensated, payment for donations for research is ethically acceptable.5 In an interview, Steinbock explained: "Any time that we ask people to do things that impose significant burdens and some degree of risk, fairness may require that they be adequately compensated. At the same time, there's a general consensus that it would be improper to offer enormous sums of money to egg donors that could sway their judgment."
contribute a comment
Comments have been closed for this post.
comments
Yea, as if women with income the level of Bonnie would submit to the onerous process of egg procurement for pay. If cloners can buy eggs, only poor women are likely to sell. And here I thought liberals opposed exploiting the poor.
- by Wesley J. Smith on Jan 26, 2006 at 1:29 AM | link
if you won't donate your eggs for free, does that make you "chicken" to do it?
- by on Jan 26, 2006 at 2:31 AM | link
If it's "exploiting the poor" every time someone does something for pay that women at Bonnie's income level wouldn't do, I should go apologize to my waitress.
- by Chamides on Jan 26, 2006 at 11:59 AM | link
There is a huge difference between earning an honest and honorable living and being exploited for your body parts, with potential serious physical consequences.
- by Wesley J. Smith on Jan 26, 2006 at 2:14 PM | link
Wow...how did Bonnie's income enter the debate? All she said was paying someone for burdens sounded reasonable
- by sotto on Jan 26, 2006 at 5:06 PM | link
Wesley - What's the moral difference between being exploited for body parts and earning a living through physical labor? I hope you are not letting your concern for very specific "body parts" skew your reasoning.
- by Bob Koepp on Jan 26, 2006 at 5:43 PM | link
Earning a living isn't being exploited. Forgetting for the moment (which we shouldn't) that the woman would be undergoing a potentially dangerous and unnecessary medical procedure, paying for eggs would be the moral equivalent to international corporation offering a Thai destitute woman 75 cents a day to make tennis shoes. Or offering the pregnant African woman $5 to test HIV drugs.
- by Wesley J. Smith on Jan 26, 2006 at 8:13 PM | link
Of course, with this argument-by-consensus, we'll see the line move, as research needs change.
- by Thomas on Jan 27, 2006 at 2:22 AM | link
I personally see no problem with compensating women who are willing to donate their eggs. Don't we pay people to give blood? Don't we compensate people who participate in clinical studies? If these women are willing to give their eggs, why shouldn't they be compensated for their time and expenses? Most people I know will not give you anything for free. Why should they?
- by charlotte on Jan 29, 2006 at 12:15 AM | link
I find it interesting that the issue of paying women to obtain eggs for research is raising such controversy at the same time we allow payment of large sums to women "donate" eggs for assisted reproduction.
Some authors have questioned this practice for years, especially because of the newspaper ads that target college-age women who might face financial pressures that would cloud their weighing of the risks and future repercussions.
I don't understand why that practice is not mentioned more in the current debate. Aren't the ethical issues virtually the same? The NEJM article seems to consider oocyte donation for ART purposes to be a separate issue.
- by Catherine on Jan 30, 2006 at 9:02 PM | link
I think that things are expensive enough, and nobody wants to do anything anymore for free. It's a shame people won't just help out and not expect anything in return. It's called an egg donation, I don't think a donation requires compensation, that's rediculous. Nobody is pushing you up against a wall and making you donate, it's an option. So I think people should quit expecting money everytime they do something.
- by Aimee on Feb 4, 2006 at 7:22 PM | link
I personally don't feel that there is anything wrong with women getting payment for donating eggs. Men have been getting paid to donate their sperm for years. People who donate plasma get reimbursed for their services. No one is forcing these women to donate their eggs. If there is exploitation going on that is a different story.
- by Erika Still on Feb 14, 2006 at 3:29 PM | link