Comparing Germany and Israel regarding debates on policy-making at the beginning of life: PGD, NIPT and their paths of routinization: PID, NIPT und ihr Weg zur Routinisierung

Research output: Journal contributionsJournal articlesResearchpeer-review

Standard

Comparing Germany and Israel regarding debates on policy-making at the beginning of life: PGD, NIPT and their paths of routinization: PID, NIPT und ihr Weg zur Routinisierung. / Raz, Aviad E.; Nov-Klaiman, Tamar; Hashiloni-Dolev, Yael et al.
In: Ethik in der Medizin , Vol. 34, No. 1, 01.03.2022, p. 65-80.

Research output: Journal contributionsJournal articlesResearchpeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Bibtex

@article{d560390eb5504d3db91c4f67633618e6,
title = "Comparing Germany and Israel regarding debates on policy-making at the beginning of life: PGD, NIPT and their paths of routinization: PID, NIPT und ihr Weg zur Routinisierung",
abstract = "Definition: The routinization of prenatal diagnosis is the source of bioethical and policy debates regarding choice, autonomy, access, and protection. To understand these debates in the context of cultural diversity and moral pluralism, we compare Israel and Germany, focusing on two recent repro-genetic “hot spots” of such policy-making at the beginning of life: pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) and non-invasive prenatal genetic testing (NIPT), two cutting-edge repro-genetic technologies that are regulated and viewed very differently in Germany and Israel, reflecting different medicolegal policies as well as public and bioethical considerations. Arguments: First, we compare policy-making in the context of PGD for HLA (human leukocyte antigen) typing, used to create sibling donors, approved in Israel under specific conditions while prohibited in Germany. Second, we compare policy-making in the context of NIPT, which came under fire in Germany, while in Israel there has been little public debate about it. Conclusion: Both countries justify their contrasting policies as reflecting a concern for the well-being and care of the embryo/child, thus highlighting different concepts of embryo/child protection, (relational) autonomy, family relations, and the impact of religion and history on the promotion/protection of life. We use the juxtaposition of PGD and NIPT to highlight some inconsistencies in policies concerning the protection of extra- and intra-corporeal embryos. We conclude by drawing on the comparison to show how national variations exist alongside co-evolution.",
keywords = "Cross-cultural bioethics, Policy-making, Preimplantation diagnosis, Prenatal testing, Reproductive genetics, Philosophy",
author = "Raz, {Aviad E.} and Tamar Nov-Klaiman and Yael Hashiloni-Dolev and Hannes Foth and Christina Sch{\"u}es and Christoph Rehmann-Sutter",
year = "2022",
month = mar,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s00481-021-00652-z",
language = "English",
volume = "34",
pages = "65--80",
journal = "Ethik in der Medizin ",
issn = "0935-7335",
publisher = "Springer",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparing Germany and Israel regarding debates on policy-making at the beginning of life: PGD, NIPT and their paths of routinization

T2 - PID, NIPT und ihr Weg zur Routinisierung

AU - Raz, Aviad E.

AU - Nov-Klaiman, Tamar

AU - Hashiloni-Dolev, Yael

AU - Foth, Hannes

AU - Schües, Christina

AU - Rehmann-Sutter, Christoph

PY - 2022/3/1

Y1 - 2022/3/1

N2 - Definition: The routinization of prenatal diagnosis is the source of bioethical and policy debates regarding choice, autonomy, access, and protection. To understand these debates in the context of cultural diversity and moral pluralism, we compare Israel and Germany, focusing on two recent repro-genetic “hot spots” of such policy-making at the beginning of life: pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) and non-invasive prenatal genetic testing (NIPT), two cutting-edge repro-genetic technologies that are regulated and viewed very differently in Germany and Israel, reflecting different medicolegal policies as well as public and bioethical considerations. Arguments: First, we compare policy-making in the context of PGD for HLA (human leukocyte antigen) typing, used to create sibling donors, approved in Israel under specific conditions while prohibited in Germany. Second, we compare policy-making in the context of NIPT, which came under fire in Germany, while in Israel there has been little public debate about it. Conclusion: Both countries justify their contrasting policies as reflecting a concern for the well-being and care of the embryo/child, thus highlighting different concepts of embryo/child protection, (relational) autonomy, family relations, and the impact of religion and history on the promotion/protection of life. We use the juxtaposition of PGD and NIPT to highlight some inconsistencies in policies concerning the protection of extra- and intra-corporeal embryos. We conclude by drawing on the comparison to show how national variations exist alongside co-evolution.

AB - Definition: The routinization of prenatal diagnosis is the source of bioethical and policy debates regarding choice, autonomy, access, and protection. To understand these debates in the context of cultural diversity and moral pluralism, we compare Israel and Germany, focusing on two recent repro-genetic “hot spots” of such policy-making at the beginning of life: pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) and non-invasive prenatal genetic testing (NIPT), two cutting-edge repro-genetic technologies that are regulated and viewed very differently in Germany and Israel, reflecting different medicolegal policies as well as public and bioethical considerations. Arguments: First, we compare policy-making in the context of PGD for HLA (human leukocyte antigen) typing, used to create sibling donors, approved in Israel under specific conditions while prohibited in Germany. Second, we compare policy-making in the context of NIPT, which came under fire in Germany, while in Israel there has been little public debate about it. Conclusion: Both countries justify their contrasting policies as reflecting a concern for the well-being and care of the embryo/child, thus highlighting different concepts of embryo/child protection, (relational) autonomy, family relations, and the impact of religion and history on the promotion/protection of life. We use the juxtaposition of PGD and NIPT to highlight some inconsistencies in policies concerning the protection of extra- and intra-corporeal embryos. We conclude by drawing on the comparison to show how national variations exist alongside co-evolution.

KW - Cross-cultural bioethics

KW - Policy-making

KW - Preimplantation diagnosis

KW - Prenatal testing

KW - Reproductive genetics

KW - Philosophy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85113950577&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/c3c2d7f7-085e-33e8-8c76-7a8a6aae1317/

U2 - 10.1007/s00481-021-00652-z

DO - 10.1007/s00481-021-00652-z

M3 - Journal articles

AN - SCOPUS:85113950577

VL - 34

SP - 65

EP - 80

JO - Ethik in der Medizin

JF - Ethik in der Medizin

SN - 0935-7335

IS - 1

ER -