Enhancing Autonomy, Authenticity And Selecting The Child With The Best Moral Life


  • Alexandru Gabriel Cioiu University of Bucharest




moral enhancement, autonomy, authenticity, assisted reproduction, Procreative Beneficence, Procreative Altruism, pharmaceuticals, Prozac, Modafinil, the right to an open future, disabilities, genetic manipulation, cognitive enhancement


In the human enhancement literature, there is a recurrent fear that biomedical technologies will negatively impact the autonomy and authenticity of moral agents, even when the agents would end up having better capacities and an improved life with the aid of these technologies. I will explore several ways in which biomedical enhancement may improve the autonomy of moral agents and try to show that biomedical methods are, all things considered, beneficial to our autonomy and authenticity. I will argue that there are instances when it’s desirable to limit the autonomy of moral agents and that strict regulations are to be put in place if a great number of people will have easy access to powerful, genetic-altering technologies which can impact the life of future children. I will advocate for using assisted reproductive technologies in order to select the child with the best chance of the best moral life and in doing so I will analyse several procreative principles which have been proposed by different scholars in the genetic enhancement debate and try to determine which one would be best to adhere to. Usually, people place high value on the concept of autonomy and there are many cases in which they end up overestimating autonomy in relation to other moral values. While autonomy is important, it’s also important to know how to limit it when reasonable societal norms require it. Sometimes autonomy is defined in strong connection with the concept of authenticity, in the sense that it’s not sufficient for our choices to be autonomous if they are not also authentic. I will try to defend the idea that authenticity can be enhanced as well with the aid of enhancement technologies which can actually prove beneficial in our quest to improve our own self.


Agar, N. (2004). Liberal Eugenics: In Defense of Human Enhancement. Blackwell.

Alloy, L. B., & Abramson, L. Y. (1979). Judgment of contingency in depressed and non-depressed students: Sadder but wiser? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 108(4), 441-485. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0096-3445.108.4.441

Anomaly, J. (2020). Creating future people: The Ethics of Genetic Enhancement. Routledge.

Baruch, S., Kaufman, D., & Hudson, K. L. (2008). Genetic testing of embryos: practices and perspectives of US IVF clinics. Fertil Steril, 89, 1053-1058. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.05.048

Beauchamp, T. L. & Childress, J. F. (2001). Principles of Biomedical Ethics (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.

Beauchamp, T., & Childress, J. (2009). Principles of biomedical ethics (6th ed). Oxford University Press.

Bernofsky, B. (1995). Liberation from self: A theory of personal autonomy. Cambridge University Press.

Bostrom, N. (2005). In Defence of Posthuman Dignity. Bioethics, 19(3), 202-214. http://www.psy.vanderbilt.edu/courses/hon182/Posthuman_dignity_Bostrom.pdf

Bostrom, N., & Ord, T. (2006), The Reversal Test: Eliminating the Status Quo Bias in Applied Ethics. Ethics, 116(4), 656-679. https://doi.org/10.1086/505233

Bruno, M. A., Pellas, F., Bernheim, J. L., Ledoux, D., Goldman, S., Demertzi, A., Majerus, S., Vanhaudenhuyse, A., Blandin, V., Boly, M., Boveroux, P., Moonen, G., Laureys, S., & Schnakers, S. (2008). Quelle vie après le Locked-in Syndrome? Revue Médicale de Liège, 63(5-6), 445-451. https://www.rmlg.ulg.ac.be/show.php

Bublitz, J. C., & Merkel, R. (2009). Autonomy and authenticity of enhanced personality traits. Bioethics, 23(6), 360-374. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8519.2009.01725.x

Chadwick, R., Shickle, D., ten Have, H., & Wiesing, U. (Eds.). (1999). The Ethics of Genetic Screening. Kluwer.

Christman, J. (1988). Constructing the inner citadel: Recent work on the concept of autonomy. Ethics, 99(1), 109-124. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdf/10.1086/293038

Darwall, S. (2006). The value of autonomy and autonomy of the will. Ethics, 116(2), 263-284. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/498461

Davis, D. (1997). Genetic dilemmas and the child’s right to an open future. The Hastings Center Report, 27(2), 7-15. https://doi.org/10.2307/3527620

Davis, D. (2009). The parental investment factor and the child’s right to an open future. The Hastings Center Report, 39(2), 24-27. https://doi.org/10.1353/hcr.0.0125

DeGrazia, D. (2000). Prozac, enhancement, and self-creation. Hastings Center Report, 30(2), 34-40. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3528313

Douglas, T., & Devolder, K. (2013). Procreative Altruism. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 38, 400-419. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jmp/jht022

Dworkin, G. (1988). The Theory and Practice of Autonomy. Cambridge University.

Earp, B. D., & Savulescu, J. (2020). Love drugs: The Chemical future of Relationships. Stanford University Press.

Elliott, C. (1998). The tyranny of happiness: Ethics and cosmetic psychopharmacology. In E. Parens (Ed.), Enhancing Human Traits. Ethical and Social Implications (pp. 177-188). Georgetown University Press.

Feinberg, J. (1992). Freedom and fulfillment: Philosophical essays. Princeton University Press.

Frankfurt, H. (1971). Freedom of the will and the concept of a person. The Journal of Philosophy, 68(1), 5-20. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2024717

Frankfurt, H. (1999). The Faintest Passion. Necessity, Volition, Love. Cambridge University Press.

Gillon, R. (2003). Ethics Needs Principles - Four Can Encompass the Rest - and Respect for Autonomy Should Be “First among Equals”. Journal of Medical Ethics, 29(5), 307-312. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jme.29.5.307

Habermas, J. (2003). The future of human nature. Polity Press.

Henrich, J. (2015). The Secret of Our Success. Princeton University Press.

Juth, N. (2011). Enhancement, autonomy, and authenticity. In J. Savulescu, R. ter Meulen & and G. Kahane (Eds.), Enhancing human capacities (pp. 34-48). Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Kant, I. (1996). Practical Philosophy (M. J. Gregor, Trans. & Ed.). Cambridge University Press.

Kass, L. (2003). Ageless bodies, happy souls. biotechnology and the pursuit of perfection. The New Atlantis, 1, 9-28. https://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/ageless-bodies-happy-souls

Kramer, P. D. (1993). Listening to Prozac. Penguin.

Levy, N. (2002). Deafness, culture and choice. Journal of Medical Ethics, 28(5), 284-285. https://dx.doi.org/10.1136%2Fjme.28.5.284

Levy, N. (2011). Enhancing authenticity. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 28(3), 308-318. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5930.2011.00532.x

Levy, N. (2012). Ecological engineering: Reshaping our environments to achieve our goals. Philosophy & Technology, 25(4), 589-604. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007%2Fs13347-012-0065-8

Malmqvist, E. (2011). Reprogenetics and the ‘Parents Have Always Done It’ Argument. Hastings Center Report, 41(1), 43-49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.1552-146X.2011.tb00099.x

Mill, J. S. (2003). On Liberty. Yale University Press.

Mundy, L. (2002, March 31). A world of their own. Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/magazine/2002/03/31/a-world-of-their-own/abba2bbf-af01-4b55-912c-85aa46e98c6b/

O’Neill, O. (2009). Autonomy and trust in bioethics. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511606250

Parens, E. (1988). Authenticity and ambivalence: Toward understanding the enhancement debate. Hastings Center Report, 35(3), 34-41. https://doi.org/10.2307/3528804

Prusak, B. G. (2005). Rethinking ‘Liberal Eugenics’: Reflections and Questions on Habermas on Bioethics. Hastings Center Report; 35(6), 31-42. https://doi.org/10.1353/hcr.2005.0113

Pugh, J. (2014). Enhancing Autonomy by Reducing Impulsivity: The Case of ADHD. Neuroethics, 7, 373-375. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-014-9202-7

Pugh, J. (2015). Autonomy, natality and freedom: a liberal re-examination of Habermas in the enhancement debate. Bioethics, 29(3), 145-152. http://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12082

Sandel, M. J. (2007). The case against perfection. Belknap.

Sartre, J. P. (1955). Being and Nothingness. Washington Square Press.

Savulescu, J. (2002). Education and debate: Deaf lesbians, ‘designer disability,’ and the future of medicine. British Medical Journal, 325(7367), 771-773. https://dx.doi.org/10.1136%2Fbmj.325.7367.771

Savulescu, J., & Kahane, G. (2009). The moral obligation to create children with the best chance of the best life. Bioethics, 23(5), 274-290. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8519.2008.00687.x

Schaefer, G. O., Kahane, G., & Savulescu, J. (2014). Autonomy and Enhancement. Neuroethics, 7(2), 123-136. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1007/s12152-013-9189-5

Shiffrin, S. (1999). Wrongful Life, Procreative Responsibility, and the Significance of Harm. Legal Theory, 5(2), 117-148. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1352325299052015

Singh, I., & Kelleher, K. (2010). Neuroenhancement in young people: proposal for research, policy, and clinical management. AJOB Neuroscience, 1, 3-16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21507740903508591

Spriggs, M. (2002). Lesbian couple create a child who is deaf like them. Journal of Medical Ethics, 28(5), 283. https://dx.doi.org/10.1136%2Fjme.28.5.283

Taylor, C. (1992). The Ethics of Authenticity. Harvard University Press.

Wertz, D. C., & Fletcher J. C. (1988). Attitudes of genetic counsellors: A multinational survey. American Journal of Human Genetics, 42(4), 592-600. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1715239/pdf/ajhg00127-0068.pdf




How to Cite

Cioiu, A. G. (2021). Enhancing Autonomy, Authenticity And Selecting The Child With The Best Moral Life. BRAIN. Broad Research in Artificial Intelligence and Neuroscience, 12(4), 423-454. https://doi.org/10.18662/brain/12.4/258

Publish your work at the Scientific Publishing House LUMEN

It easy with us: publish now your work, novel, research, proceeding at Lumen Scientific Publishing House

Send your manuscript right now