HOME >

*Chapter Three* How far are Criticism Possible

On Private Property (shiteki-shoyu ron)

last update: 20161031


Chapter
*One* A Subject called Private Property
*Two* Private Property: Authentic and Unauthentic
*Three* How far Criticisms Go?
*Four* Others
*Five* Problem on Drawing the Line
*Six* Politics to Individual
*Seven* Route and Dead End
*Eight* Affirmation of Meritocracy that Negates Meritocracy
*Nine* Meet with Rightful Eugenics



"The screening and administrative procedures were outlined by the director as simple and proven successful. As a potential surrogate, I had to pass an interview with the director and psychologist, history and physical examination, and finally meet with a lawyer who would explain the contract before I signed to officially enter the program. Parents desiring surrogate services also had to pass screening by the director and pay $25,000 at contract signing. While pregnant, the surrogate receives approximately $200 to purchase maternity clothing, and is reimbursed 15¢/mile for transportation costs. It is her responsibility to enter the program with medical insurance that includes maternity benefits. The company will pay her medical and life insurance premiums and non-covered medical costs while she is in the program. After delivery of the baby to the father, the surrogate receives her $10,000 fee." (Ince 1984:100-101)

"When it becomes possible to transfer human embryos routinely from one woman to another (and it has already been done experimentally), then the way opens up to use Third World women to gestate babies for wealthier westerners." (Corea 1987:43) (067)

". . . Third World women are used as cheap breeders for white . . . (and at least one surrogate entrepreneur has concrete plans now for this international traffic). . ." (Corea 1990:326)

Although we have acknowledged an issue of transferring by an actual individual, we experience the sense of resistance in making use of that action. I wonder why. Assertions we have seen in chapter 2 do not give us the answer. In this chapter, let us examine some criticism on "reproductive technologies." Those who are to be utilizing the reproductive technologies, for instance, as long as a woman has decided on making a contract for surrogate as a result of self-decision over her own body, there is an opinion that a contract of surrogate mother should be allowed. This opinion is also an assertion of self-possession and self-decision. I wonder what should be said on criticism over this issue although a self-decision has been made based on a woman's situation. Let us verify moot points one by one in this chapter.

Section one. First, as the presupposition of the decision making, there should be a request on information. Likewise, there should be no problem if the complete information is given. Next, an indication should be made if action is not based on self-decision as well as assertion that decision making by the concerned person cannot be accepted as is (for the sake of the concerned person as well). The indication should be requested with much stronger condition that the normal self-decision has been requested. Along with this issue, there should be also clarification on any question that upsets the concerned person's self-decision making.

In section 2, in fairness, let us examine the assertion that points out an individual's resource imbalance. First, there has been a point made in unfairness for the user (technology bestows favors on wealthy people only). On this issue, however, is it possible for everybody to use? Second, on the point made for the poor woman who becomes surrogate, a reality in that situation can be accepted, but the problem of reproductive technology is unanswered. Criticisms that we have seen so far -- are they enough to be called criticisms? The points that have been made should not be null, but we need better explanation.

I will examine the differences in gift and purchase, and the nature of commonality. There seems to be a measure in which an existing method is used and the sense of resistance when things are compared. Nevertheless, after the decision-making and transfer have been made, "I" am still left out. I myself have not been compared. If "I" am not an entity of transferring, is it not true that there will be no problem how we treat an object that serves my decision making? Rethinking processes will start from this point. Only after, there should be reexamination of moot points that we have seen in sections one and two. This examination of works will be seen in chapter 4. (068)


1. Condition of Self-Decision
Examine the Criticisms
Information for the Decisions
Criticism that says It is not Self-Decision
Invasion by Others/ Paternalism

2. Viewpoint called Fairness
What has been the Problem?
Profit by Riches Only?
Poor Exploited?

3. On Exchange and Gift
On Exchange and Gift
Principality Distracting?

REV: 20161031
TOP HOME (http://www.arsvi.com/a/index.htm)