Page 21

Update item information
Title Sex and consequences: world population growth vs. reproductive rights?
Subject Birth control--Moral and ethical aspects; Population policy; Contraception
Description The 54th Annual Frederick Reynolds Lecture
Creator Battin, M. Pabst
Publisher Division of Continuing Education, University of Utah
Date 1994-05-25
Date Digital 2008-05-29
Type Text
Format image/jpeg
Digitization Specifications Original scanned on Epson Expression 10000XL flatbed scanner and saved as 400 ppi uncompressed tiff. Display images generated in PhotoshopCS and uploaded into CONTENTdm Aquisition Station.
Resource Identifier http://content.lib.utah.edu/u?/reynolds,830
Source HQ766.2 B38 1994
Language eng
Relation Digital reproduction of "Sex and consequences," J. Willard Marriott Library Special Collections
Rights Digital Image Copyright University of Utah
Metadata Cataloger Seungkeol Choe; Ken Rockwell
ARK ark:/87278/s6b85633
Setname uu_fwrl
Date Created 2008-07-29
Date Modified 2008-08-04
ID 320093
Reference URL https://collections.lib.utah.edu/ark:/87278/s6b85633

Page Metadata

Title Page 21
Description The Moral Conditions of Universal Automatic Contraceptive Use. I've already argued that reversing the default mechanism would not only result in potentially dramatic decreases in population growth, but that it would substantially enhance both male and female reproductive freedom. We cannot, I believe, welcome one of these consequences without the other. But the latterâ€" enhanced reproductive freedomâ€"would be the case, I believe, only if two conditions were rigorously met. Nevertheless, if both of these conditions are rigorously met, for instance by being incorporated in law (say, as civil rights or as constitutional guarantees) or in whatever social policies are in effect, the universal use of background contraceptives can, I think, remain ethically defensible independently of the means it is actually brought about: a) universality. If any pressures are to be permitted to secure more widespread use beyond what would be the product of individual, voluntary choice, it must be the case that they are expected or required of everyoneâ€"not just those groups perceived to be at the highest risk of unwanted pregnancy. This is true for two principal reasons. For one thing, requirements of universality are essential to prevent the kind of inequitable treatment and potential genocide that develops as specific racial, ethnic, or behavioral groups are targeted for birth control while others are not. In particular, this precludes the kind of computation of risk, often highly infected with prejudice, that perpetuates stereotypes of group behavior often inapplicable to individualsâ€"for example, the claim that black inner-city teenagers "need" Norplant because their rates of illegitimacy are higher while white suburban teenagers do not, or that third-world populations "ought" to have the IUD because they are incapable of disciplined economic growth. To be sure, everyone means everyoneâ€" or rather, every fertile woman and, as the technology becomes available, every fertile man, without reference to past, current, or anticipated sexual activity. Universality is crucial, especially in any program involving pressure of any sort, because it is what guarantees the right not to have oneself either as an indi- ...21 ..
Format image/jpeg
Identifier 022-RNLT-BattinMP_Page 21.jpg
Source Original Manuscript: Sex & consequences : world population growth vs. reproductive rights? by Margaret P. Battin.
Setname uu_fwrl
Date Created 2008-07-29
Date Modified 2008-07-29
ID 320086
Reference URL https://collections.lib.utah.edu/ark:/87278/s6b85633/320086