I have clearly entered an argue against myself phase, and since reading this article quoted on Genomeboy pushed me further into this “disagree with self” state, I am going to argue against another one of my posts.
In a previous post called “Should public health care pay for IVF-treatment ?” I argued that public health care, with its limited resources, should not prioritize ART/IVF, especially not in developing countries where health resources can be very limited indeed. This spurred a lengthy discussion with Faith over at Invisible Grief. I must admit that I learned a lot from that discussion. Now, since I am also considering Transhumanism, it is time to reevaluate where I stand on this subject. Transhumanism is all about giving everyone access to biomedical technology and also about embracing the widespread use of such technologies to enhance our biological selves.
Whatever I may land on on Transhumanism however, I have reached the conclusion that everyone should have access to ART/IVF. This I guess, is in contrast to arguments in my previous post.
……But, I still think that this treatment should be financed separately (outside of the public health budgets), either through dedicated public funds or privately. Such a separation will clearly state that ART is a desired medical technology either as a part of a policy on reproduction for everyone or as a part of a womens rights plan. The key criterion for such an endorsement of ART/IVF must be universal and unrestricted access to assisted reproduction technologies for everyone.
….Accessible to everyone………herein lies the crux…….Answer: It must be publicly funded. Thus, I stand corrected (by me), – again.