What do you think?
Rate this book
Children on Demand: The Ethics of Defying Nature
Children on Demand examines the ethics of various forms of alternative parenthood, focusing specifically on adoption and assisted reproductive technologies, and the moral dilemmas they create for both individuals and the state. Tom Frame discusses the ethical challenges that arise when scientific possibilities get ahead of community consensus. The central question of this comprehensive, careful and challenging book is what is best for the child?
224 pages, Paperback
First published March 1, 2008
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
August 16, 2022
I could tell I was in for a rough ride right from chapter one of this book. It contained the ludicrous statement that natural behaviour is synonymous with good behaviour. Would by this logic the author condone war, homicide, infanticide, exploitation, the destruction of the environment? All behaviours which occur naturally. It was clear from that point that what the author really wanted to say when he talked about what was natural, was what was Divinely created but that wouldn't reach the audience desired. The book continues to present a premise that the only natural and therefore good family is one where parents are heterosexual, one man one woman, and biologically related to their children. Anything outside of this is tantamount to child abuse. That is not my exaggeration, he literally makes that connection. He also compares not knowing your biological parents to being disabled.
The book is full of hypocrisy, biased personal opinions and absurd unfounded statements dressed up like scientific fact. Any scientific research that is counter to his own views is in his opinion full of errors and bias. The people that agree with his points are obviously free from such things. He backs his own views with mainly using a few select anecdotes and his own personal experience. Topics are brought up with the promise of later in depth analysis which never materialises. Case studies are deliberate chosen to present horrible worst case scenarios to back his absurd criteria that even the potential for the harm of one child is grounds enough to do away with something all together. A argument that is never applied to the things he agrees with, like conception by heterosexual sex within the marriage.
Some examples:
In his view growing up without the knowledge of your biological parents hinders the development of personal identity in a debilitating way, so 'secret' adoption is bad, anonymous donor conception also bad. However he is all for inter-country adoption because removing a child from their own cultural heritage would clearly have no effect on identity formation.
He defends his view that only married heterosexual couples should be allowed to have children by stating the false claim that that is the only natural way to parent and as such is the way its always been. In a book that includes a whole chapter on the history of adoption! This clearly shows his own willingness to purport unsubstantiated biased opinion while simultaneous denouncing those who would do so in ways that disagree with his perspective.
Don't read this book. Don't.
The book is full of hypocrisy, biased personal opinions and absurd unfounded statements dressed up like scientific fact. Any scientific research that is counter to his own views is in his opinion full of errors and bias. The people that agree with his points are obviously free from such things. He backs his own views with mainly using a few select anecdotes and his own personal experience. Topics are brought up with the promise of later in depth analysis which never materialises. Case studies are deliberate chosen to present horrible worst case scenarios to back his absurd criteria that even the potential for the harm of one child is grounds enough to do away with something all together. A argument that is never applied to the things he agrees with, like conception by heterosexual sex within the marriage.
Some examples:
In his view growing up without the knowledge of your biological parents hinders the development of personal identity in a debilitating way, so 'secret' adoption is bad, anonymous donor conception also bad. However he is all for inter-country adoption because removing a child from their own cultural heritage would clearly have no effect on identity formation.
He defends his view that only married heterosexual couples should be allowed to have children by stating the false claim that that is the only natural way to parent and as such is the way its always been. In a book that includes a whole chapter on the history of adoption! This clearly shows his own willingness to purport unsubstantiated biased opinion while simultaneous denouncing those who would do so in ways that disagree with his perspective.
Don't read this book. Don't.
Displaying 1 of 1 review