Responsabilidad reproductiva y el problema de la no identidad

EDUARDO RIVERA LÓPEZ

Granada, España

Congreso; V Congreso Internacional de la Sociedad Iberoamericana de Estudios Utilitaristas; 2007

Sociedad Iberoamericana de Estudios Utilitaristas

The question I address in this paper is whether and under what conditions it is morally right to bring a person into existence. I defend the commonsensical thesis that, other things being equal, it is morally wrong create a person who will  be below some threshold of quality of life, even if the life of this potential person, once created, will nevertheless be worth living. However commonsensical this view might seem, it has shown to be problematic because of the so-called "Non-Identity Problem". Both utilitarian and rights-based approaches have been unable to provide a solution to this problem. I rest my thesis on what I call the "transitivity argument", which contains two premises: that causing a disability or impairment in a future person is prima facie wrong, so long as we can avoid causing such a disability to that very person; and that reproduction, under normal conditions, is prima facie morally indifferent (I call this premise the "Indifference thesis"). From these two premises, I conclude that it is prima facie wrong to bring into existence a person with a non-trivial disability or impairment (which might be, nonetheless, compatible with a worthwhile life), even if the only available alternative is to remain childless.