Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Clinical challenges to the concept of ectogestation

Bibliographic Data

ID21514890
AuthorsPhillip S Wozniak (0000-0002-7863-5773, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio, USA, corresponding author)
Year2023
Volume49
Issue2
Pages115-120
Publication date2023-02-01
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Medical Ethics (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0306-6800 • E-ISSN: 1473-4257
PublisherBMJ (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1136/medethics-2021-107892
PMID35144980
OpenAlexW4211229368
LanguageEN
Citations received3
References cited32

Since the publication of the successful animal trials of the Biobag, a prototypical extrauterine support for extremely premature neonates, numerous ethicists have debated the potential implications of such a device. Some have argued that the Biobag represents a natural evolution of traditional newborn intensive care, while others believe that the Biobag would create a new class of being for the patients housed within. Kingma and Finn argued in Bioethics for making a categorical distinction between fetuses, newborns and ‘gestatelings’ in a Biobag on the basis of a conceptual distinction between ectogenesis versus ectogestation. Applying their arguments to the clinical realities of newborn intensive care, however, demonstrates the inapplicability of their ideas to the practice of medicine. Here, I present three clinical examples of the difficulty and confusion their argument would create for clinicians and offer a possible remedy: namely, discarding the term ‘artificial womb’ in favour of ‘Biobag’

Bioethics · Categorical imperative · Categorical variable · Confusion · Engineering ethics · Epistemology · Intensive care · Intensive care medicine · Political science · Psychoanalysis · Computer Science · Ethics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare · Law · Medicine · Neonatal Respiratory Health Research · Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues · Philosophy · Psychology

  • Parental autonomy and ethical challenges in artificial placenta trials

    Alice Cavolo, Daniel Pizzolato•Journal of Medical Ethics•2026

  • Regulating abortion after ectogestation

    Joona Räsänen•Journal of Medical Ethics•2023

  • Considering the Developing Entity in an Artificial Womb as a Patient

    Open Access•Frédérique Drouin, Alice Cavolo et al.•Bioethics•2025

  • Conventional revolution

    Phillip S Wozniak, Ashley K Fernandes•Journal of Medical Ethics•2021

  • Gestaticide

    Daniel Rodger, Nicholas Colgrove et al.•Journal of Medical Ethics•2021

  • The ‘tyranny of reproduction’

    Open Access•Kathryn L Mackay•Bioethics•2020

  • Neonatal incubator or artificial womb? Distinguishing ectogestation and ectogenesis using the metaphysics of pregnancy

    Open Access•Elselijn Kingma, Suki Finn•Bioethics•2020

Citations per year1
Citation span2023 - 2026 (4)
Highly citedNo

Tools

Open DOI
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae