The Intersection of Normative Language, Moral Status, and Personhood When Discussing the Ethical Complexities of Artificial Womb Technology

Abstract: Recent progress in artificial womb technology (AWT) to aid in lung maturation for extremely prematurely born infants has raised pressing ethical questions surrounding the moral status and personhood of such beings. Currently, the literature is divided in its use of nomenclature to refer to patients who may undergo newborn therapy using AWT, using terms such as neonate, baby, gestateling, and the fetal neonate—or fetonate. Here, I propose the term perinate (i.e. around the time of birth) to describe patients currently existing in an AWT setting to distinguish the moral status and personhood of such a being from that of a fetus or a neonate. In this presentation, I will examine three clinical cases of different stages of human development, contextualized by their intra- or extrauterine location, and by a casuistry approach using comparative case analysis, inductively reason guiding principles for the moral status (and subsequent rights) of each being. Once discussed, the differentiation of moral status between the three cases will inform the clinical ethical obligations to perinates in intensive care and research settings. Specifically, does the untethering of a mother from their fetus during gestation allow for the ethical research of novel perinatal therapies when divorced from maternal risk? The main purpose of this work is to differentiate the novel moral status of a perinate from that of a fetus or a neonate and examine the implications for beneficence-based obligations to each in a clinical setting.

Dana Howard, PhD – Assistant Professor, Division of Bioethics, Ohio State University College of Medicine