Free Market Reproduction Learning
Infertility stands as one of the primary health dysfunctions, which affects a significant population of individuals across the world. The incidence of global infertility is hard to approximate due to various factors. Despite the numerous challenges in establishing rates of infertility, statistical results from the Demographic and Health Survey indicate that at least one in every four couples in developing nations experience infertility (Silva et al., 2019). Moreover, statistical estimates suggest that the population of individuals experiencing infertility may be as high as 15%, especially in developed countries (Silva et al., 2019). In the backdrop of this problem, the advent of assisted reproduction technology has proved to be instrumental in aiding individuals with infertility to realize their dreams of having children. From the period that marked the first successful conception through assisted reproductive technology in 1978, the use of the reproduction method has increased rapidly (Silva et al., 2019). In 2014 in the US, 169568 assisted reproductive technology procedures led to 56,028 live-birth deliveries and 68,782 infants, which represented 1.6% of births in that year (Silva et al., 2019). However, the increased use of assisted reproductive technology raises significant ethical issues, which are substantially divisive. The focus of addressing these ethical concerns has focused on the suitability of applying controls on the free market of reproduction. To this end, controlling the free market of reproduction is an effective way of addressing ethical issues of assisted reproductive technology.
The fact that a free market for reproductive assistance is the source of ethical issues is the reason why I feel that market regulation is an appropriate means of addressing the ethical concerns of the problem. In particular, leaving access to assisted reproductive services to the free market is an act of privatizing infertility and causes failure in dealing with the reality of race and class bias in the distribution of this critical medical resource. While assisted reproduction method has become a predominant health intervention, there exist profound inequities in access to the reproductive treatment between nations and among dissimilar socio-economic and ethnic segments within countries (Harris et al., 2016). Female individuals from poor backgrounds access to assisted reproduction treatment is less in comparison to women from financially endowed backgrounds (Harris et al., 2016). Often, the high cost associated with reproductive treatment is the main barrier to accessibility among poor women. Moreover, leaving assisted reproductive treatment to the free market trivializes the importance associated with accessing care, particularly in women’s lives. Therefore, it is increasingly necessary to control the market for assisted reproduction technologies to address the ethical concerns related to the method.
Similarly, from the available responses, I perceive that response C is the most ethical since it suggests that imposing controls on the free market can result in outcomes that favor the desired ethics on the issue. Besides, this response is the most ethical because it explains that the market is free of bias. Individuals are the ones who are responsible for biases through the functions of demand and supply (West Coast University, n.d.). Often, the cost of assisted reproductive treatment is high (Rozée & Unisa, 2016). The claim that the interaction of demand and supply causes biases in the market implies that it is appropriate to impose control measures that can prevent these biases. Controlling the market will ensure that all infertile patients, irrespective of their economic background, can access the assisted reproduction services.
In conclusion, infertility is a problem that affects a significant number of individuals across the world. While assisted reproductive treatment provides hope of solving this issue, it is increasingly vital to impose controls on the free market for these services. This move will address ethical concerns and ensure that the service is accessible to a large number of individuals and couples battling infertility.