Il Dibattito Attorno All’ectogenesi: Un’analisi Quantita-Tiva e Qualitativa Degli Auspici e Timori Della Comunità Scientifica
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7213/rev.dir.econ.socioambienta.05.001.AO02Keywords:
Cittadinanza scientifica, Utero artificiale, Neofeudalesimo, Innovazione radicale, Salute, Società post moderna, Iperumano, Femminismo, Aborto, Convergenza RING.Abstract
Comprendere i processi di convergenza delle tecnologie robotiche, informatiche, nanotecnologiche e genetiche (RING) e lo sviluppo delle resistenze a queste innovazioni (neo-feudalesimo) è essenziale per prevedere e discutere le traiettorie dei sistemi sociali che caratterizzeranno il mondo nel prossimo futuro. Questi processi e le tensioni sociali che generano possono essere pienamente compresi studiando lo sviluppo dei dibattiti che generano in ambito accademico. Spesso, infatti, questi dibattiti si sono originati molto tempo prima che le tecnologie fossero realmente disponibili, grazie alla lungimiranza di pensatori visionari, e ne anticipano le conseguenze sociali. Lungo questa linea, il presente lavoro analizza gli sviluppi del dibattito sull’ectogenesi iniziato negli anni venti grazie alle intuizioni di J.D.B. Haldane. Ripercorriamo le varie fasi del dibattito con l’obiettivo di evidenziare le sue linee comuni e le argomentazioni che sono, invece, specifiche di alcuni periodi storici. Inoltre, intendiamo analizzare come il dibattito, nato inizialmente da una speculazione “fantascientifica”, si sia evoluto parallelamente allo sviluppo tecnologico, ad esempio con i progressi delle tecnologie associate alla realizzazione di un utero artificiale.Downloads
References
Atlan, H. (2006). L’utero Artificiale. Milano: Giuffré Editore.
Botti, C. (2009). Sull’aborto.Iride. 58, XXII: 539-559.
Brittain, V. (1929). Halycyon, or the Future of Monogamy. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, andTrübner.
Bulletti C., Jasonni V.M., Martinelli G., Govoni E., Tabanelli S., Ciotti P.M., Flamigni C. (1987). A 48-hour preservation of an isolated human uterus: endometrial responses to sex steroids. Fertil Steril, 47:122–129
Bulletti, C Palagiano, A Pace, C Cerni, A Borini, A de Ziegler, D. (2011). The artifi-cial womb. Reproductive Science, 1221:124-128.
Bulletti, C., Jasonni, V.M., Lubicz, S., Flamigni, C. and Gurpide, E. (1986). Extracor-poreal perfusion of the humanuterus. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 154:683-688.
Bulletti, C., Palagiano, A. et al. (2011). The Artificial Womb. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1221:124-128.
Callaghan, J. et al. (1962). “Study of Prepulmonary Bypass in the Development of an Artificial Placenta for Prematurity and Respiratory Distress Syndrome of the Newborn,” Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery,44:600-607.
Callaghan, J., Delos Angeles, J. (1961). “Long Term Extracorporeal Circulation in the Development of an Artificial Placenta for Respiratory Distress of the Newborn”.Surgical Forum 12(1961): 215-217.
Cannold, L. (2006). Chapter four: Women, Ectogenesis and Ethical Theory. Ecto-genesis.
Carroll, E.A., Latulipe C., Fung R., Terry M. (2009). “Creativity factor evaluation: towards astandardized survey metric for creativity support. In: Proceedings of the 2009 conference on creativity and cognition”, pp.127–136. Berkeley: ACM Press.
Chamberlain, G. (1968). “An Artificial Placenta: The Development of an Extracor-poreal System for Maintenance of Immature Infants with Respiratory Problems,” American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology,100: 615-626.
Chesler, P. (1988). The Sacred Bond: The Legacy of Baby M. New York: Time Books.
Coleman, S. (2004). The Ethics of Artificial Uteruses. England: Ashgate.
Corea, G. (1987). Reproductive Technologies from Artificial Insemination to Arti-ficial Wombs. New York: Harper and Row.
Doi, S., Yamada K., (2011). Symbiotic technology for creating social innovation 30 years in the future, Ai & Society, 26:197-204.
Donati, P. (1993). La cittadinanza societaria, Roma-Bari: Laterza.
Dworkin, A. (1983). Right-wing Women. New York: Coward-McCann, pp. 187-188.
Firestone, S. (1975).The Dialectic of Sex: The Case for Feminist Revolution. New York: Morrow.
Fogg, B.J. (2003). Persuasive technology: using computers to change what we think and do. San Francisco, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
Freitas, R.A.J. (1980). Fetal Adoption.The Humanist, 40:22-23.
Fullick, A. (2009). Test Tube Babies: In Vitro Fertilization (Science at the Edge), Portsmouth:Heinemann.
Gratton, L. (2011).The shift: The future of work is already here. Londra: Harper Collins.
Haire, N. (1927). Hymen, or the Future of Marriage. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, and Trübner.
Haldane, J. B. S. (1923). Daedalus; or, Science and the Future. London: Kegan & Paul Publ.
Harris, J. (2007). Enhancing Evolution. Princeton:Princeton University Press.
Huxley, A. (1932). Brave New World: a Novel. London: Chatto & Windus.
Langford, S. (2008). An end to abortion? A feminist critique of the 'ectogenetic solution' to abortion. Women Studies International Forum, 31:263-269.
Ludovici, A.M. (1927). Lysistrata, or Womans Future and Future Woman. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, and Trübner.
Nicole, C. (2007). Brave New World at 75.New Atlantis, 10.
Nowotny, H. (2006). Curiosità insaziabile. Torino:Codice.Il dibattito attorno all’ectogenesi: un’analisi quantita-tiva e qualitativa degli auspici e timori della comunità scientifica
O’Brien, M. (1981). The Politics of Reproduction. Boston: Routledge and Kegan Paul, pp. 35-36.
Overall, C. (1993). Human Reproduction: Principles, Practices, Policies. Toronto: Oxford University Press.
Patel, S.N., Reynolds, M.S., Abowd, G.D. (2008). “Detecting human movement by differential air pressure sensing in HVAC system ductwork: an exploration in infrastructure mediated sensing”. In: Proceedings of Pervasive2008, Sydney,pp 1–18.
Paul, E. (1930). Chronos, or the Future of the Family. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, and Trübner.
Pitasi, A. (2010). Teoria sistemica e complessità morfogenetica del capitalismo, Roma: Aracne.
Pitasi, A. (2012). Ipecittadinanza. Strategie sistemiche e mutamento globale. Milano: Franco Angeli
Pitasi, A., Ferone E. (2008), Il tempo zero del desiderio, Milano:McGraw-Hill.
Reiber, D. T. (2010). The morality of artificial womb technology. National Catho-lic Bioethics Quarterly, 10(3), 515-528.
Rowland, R. (1985). A child at any price? An overview of issues in the use of the new reproductive technologies, and the threat to women. Women's Studies Int. Forum, 8(6), 539-546.
Rowland, R. (1987). Reproductive Technologies: The Final Solution to the Wo-men Question”. In Test-tube Women, ed. Ruth Arditti et al. p.45. London: Pandora Press.
Rowland, R. (1985). Motherhood, Patriarchal Power, Alienation and the Issue of Choice”, in Man-made Women:How New Reproductive Technologies Affect Wo-man, eds. Gena Corea et al. London: Hutchinson.
Sander-Staudt, M. (2006). Chapter eight: Of Machine Born? A Feminist Asses-sment of Ectogenesis and Artificial Wombs. Ectogenesis.
Sarin, C.L. et al (1966). “Further Development of an Artificial Placenta with the use of Membrane Oxegenator and Venovenous Perfusion,” Surgery 60: pp.754-760.
Schore, A. (2002). The neurobiology of attachment and early personality organi-zation. Journal of Prenatal & Perinatal Psychology and Health, 16:249-263.
Shanley, M. L. (1993). Surrogate mothering and women's freedom: A critique of contracts for human reproduction. Signs, 18(3), 618-639.
Simonstein, F., Mashiach-Eizenberg, M. (2008). “The artificial womb: A pilot study considering people’s views on the artificial womb and ectogenesis in Isra-el”, Cambridge Quarterly of Healtcare Ethic, 18: 87-94.
Singer, P., Wells, D. (1985). Making Babies: The New Science and Ethics of Con-ception. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.
Soldera, G. (2002). The individual life project: A new way of flscovering the un-born child world and potentialities. Journal of Pre-and Perinatal Psychology, 16(4): 361-376.
Squires, S. (1994). Babies in Bottles: Twentieth-Century Visions of Reproductive Technology. NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Tong, R. (2006). Out of Body Gestation. In Whose best Interest? in Ectogenesis; artificial womb technology and the future of human reproduction. (EDS) Scott Gelfand and John R. Shook. Amsterdam, Editions Rodopi, pp. 59-77.
Webster, V. (1989). Reprod. Health Servs., 492 U.S. 490, 554 n.9.
Weinberg, J. K. (1988). Abortion, technology and the law. The Women's Review of Books, 6(3): 9-10
Woolfrey, J. (2006). Chapter nine: Ectogenesis: Liberation, Technological Tyranny, or just more of the same? Ectogenesis.
Yuko, E.I. (2012). Is the development of artificial wombs ethically desirable?PhD thesis, Dublin City University.
Yumakulov S., Wolbring, G. (2012). Ethics of artificial wombs: missing angles and special concerns, Yura, BHSc Research Symposium, 2(2).
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish in this Journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the Journal of Economic and Socio-Environmental Law the right of first publication with the article simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons - Attribution 4.0 International which allows sharing the work with recognition of the authors and its initial publication in this Journal.
- Authors are able to take on additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the paper published in this Journal (eg.: publishing in institutional repository or as a book), with a recognition of its initial publication in this Journal.
- Authors are allowed and encouraged to publish their work online (eg.: in institutional repositories or on their personal website) at any point before or during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as increase the impact and the citation of the published work (see the Effect of Open Access).
