Imagine a world… where ectogenesis isn’t needed to eliminate social and economic barriers for women

The path toward ectogenesis: looking beyond the technical challenges

“…If ectogenesis is able not only to increase health outcomes for new-borns, but also to minimize maternal morbidity and mortality, natural pregnancy might be considered risky and the choice to gestate might become stigmatized, and maybe even blameworthy when negative health outcomes do result [ 23 , 47 , 72 , 73 ]. Some authors worry that ectogenesis could therefore oppose the meaning that some people find in gestation and childbirth, exposing a conflict between wellbeing of the future child and autonomy of the pregnant person [ 23 , 68 , 72 , 73 ]. There is reason to believe that especially for individuals from disadvantaged groups this may lead to increased pressure to use ectogenesis to secure the safety of the fetus, which, in turn, is a reason to be sceptical about the freedom-promoting potential of AWT (see below).…”

“…There is, however, no clear ethical reason why ectogenesis cannot be used to achieve a non-medical goal if that goal is valuable and acceptable [ 81 , 86 ]. Yet, it is not evident that women’s exclusive role in the gestation of children is the origin of gender inequalities more generally [ 24 , 72 , 73 , 81 ]. If not pregnancy but other biological gender differences, gender roles and/or oppressive social structures are the problem, ectogenesis will not resolve gender inequality.…”

“…Some fear that a greater knowledge of the fetal development through ectogenesis could be used to justify greater control on normal pregnancies [32]. If ectogenesis is able not only to increase health outcomes for new-borns, but also to minimize maternal morbidity and mortality, natural pregnancy might be considered risky and the choice to gestate might become stigmatized, and maybe even blameworthy when negative health outcomes do result [23,47,72,73]. Some authors worry that ectogenesis could therefore oppose the meaning that some people find in gestation and childbirth, exposing a conflict between wellbeing of the future child and autonomy of the pregnant person [23,68,72,73].…”

Medical ethics and broadening the context of debate

“…There is a corollary in Horner's commentary and she points out that the value of thinking about how ectogenesis could promote liberty and equality in a possible future might shed light on what it's involved in changing society so that liberty and equality are improved. 8 Campo-Engelstein observes that Cavaliere's worries about liberty and equality have also been raised in connection with reproductive technologies such as egg sharing. 9 She argues that such technologies should not be seen as the solutions to injustice and in the case of egg sharing it has had beneficial liberty and equality changes for some women.…”

‘Gestation, Equality and Freedom: Ectogenesis as a Political Perspective’ response to commentaries

“…In her commentary, Claire Horner disputes whether ectogenesis has any value at all , even of the kind that I am proposing. She argues that (1) critiques of ectogenesis do not give guidance regarding how to change unjust states of affairs and (2) the focus should not be on pregnancy but on the lack of ‘political and social support for all who parent’ 4. According to Horner, ectogenesis’ value is ‘limited even in its ability to advance this political perspective’ 4.…”