Margaret Battin's Belief of forced contraceptive devices...?

Question

I'm taking an ethics course this quarter at my college. It's a very different experience from what I normally take (science related, I'm a Microbiology major), but I need to fulfill my humanities requirement. Anyway, one interesting article we had to read was Margaret Battin's Sex & Consequences: World Population Growth vs Reproductive Rights, where she proposes that every single female in the world should be implanted with a contraceptive device (such as the IUD or Norplant) alongside routine things like exams, and only when she wants to get pregnant can she have it removed. The idea is the world's population is growing too large to support us, so this is idea is in line with utilitarianism because the individuals right is being sacrificed for the greater good of the world (survival). My professor was an adament supporter of this idea and shot down every rebuttal I had to it. Frankly, I find the idea that a woman not having control over what goes in her own body to be appalling, BUT

he kept comparing it to vaccinations and saying it was no different since we do not have a choice with being vaccinated. He says our choice is eliminated for the greater good of the community, and that this program of force contraceptive devices would be the same. He also wasn't interested in the practical applications of it and said we had to assume that every woman could tolerate the device, etc.

Anyway, I was just wondering what others thought of this. This isn't for an assignment. I've already completed and turned in my paper for this topic and tomorrow we're on to a new paper, but this issue really bothered me enough that I got in a large debate with my professor and I just wanted to vent and get other people's opinions. Thanks!

Answer 1

Margaret Battin is stupid.

First of all... since when is giving birth the same as an infectious disease?

Secondly... people who are willing to have sex ought to be mature enough to consider taking contraceptions or dealing with the consequences.

Just listening to what you shared about this woman makes me ill.

Answer 2

Of course no one should dictate to a woman whether she can or can't have children, except in the case of the mentally ill or retarded, those women may not be capable of making good choices or caring for offspring. Other than that I wonder what your professor would say to the argument that such a system would primarily be enforced amoung the upper and middle classes, while the poor or people on the fringes of society who are often the ones lacking in normal medical care would also slip through this system. Therefore the very poor, uneducated and possibly illegals would have a hughly disproportionate number of offspring.

Answer 3

Margaret Battin

Answer 4

Well if every woman gets fitted with these devices we will have 0.8% of our population sterile and who knows how many more due to the increase in risk of infection if you have multiple partners. The 0.8% is women who were informed they had to have 1 sexual partner and choose not to so imagine if they weren't given to option to reject it. Pregnancy rate would go down. But a woman under 25 who hasn't had children cant be fitted either there's another increase in infertility! I just see to many women loosing fertility for the utilitarians. N what if I don't believe in utilitarian? What If Im a oh god what where they callled thsoe who are out 4 them selves only???

Answer 5

This professor must respect other people's point of view. If you want to get an A, tell him he is right, but I would rather get an F from this one. There are many ways to control population growth other than forced methods. Education is one. Ask this professor if he would implant by force his devices on his mother and daughter first.

Answer 6

interior the U. S., a public college can't legally deny admission to a pupil on the grounds they have no longer been vaccinated if the parents sign a waiver that they are refusing to have their baby vaccinated on religious, ethical, or medical grounds. a minimum of interior the U. S., compelled birth control could be a sparkling violation no longer basically of our top to medical autonomy, yet additionally to our constitutional top to freedom of religion. imposing a regulation to enforce mandatory birth control could require a constitutional substitute overturning an element of the 1st substitute. it extremely is slightly complicated in case you question me. Now, criminal matters aside, it extremely is my physique, and the government has no top to tell me what i will and can't do with it. there's a hazard of area outcomes from any medical technique. for somebody who isn't sexually lively, a contraceptive implant is mindless, and is an irresponsible medical selection. yet another concern, what do you think of could take place in 0.33 worldwide counties, the place medical components are not obtainable, even to governments? people could have pretend, doubtlessly hazard implants put in below unclean circumstances, ensuing in ineffectual birth control, and additionally doubtlessly life-threatening infections. people could take transport of injections with needles that weren't sterilized, doubtlessly ensuing in new infections. it extremely is concept on the HIV virus maximum possibly resulted truly from the reuse of needles in the time of smallpox vaccination campaigns. So this adverse aspects coming up a bigger subject than it extremely is fixing. In a appropriate worldwide, the place governments are not corrupt, medical ideas don't have area outcomes, and all people has get entry to to sufficient medical care, why no longer? in spite of this, a appropriate worldwide ought to take care of an infinitely great inhabitants. Oh, and in case you probably did no longer determine it out from the 1st 2 paragaphs, i'm from the U. S..

Answer 7

In this scenario, who decides when a pregnancy may occur? If it is entirely up to the individual, how is that not having control of one's own body? In fact, providing reliable birth control to women the world over seems to give them more control over what goes on in their own bodies.

Answer 8

Might as well make a situation presented in "Children of Men" then.