Reproductive health is important for the individual. The ability to control if and when to have children are of major importance, where both birth control pills, and sterilization are central features in family planning. For couples and singles whose only wish to have a child but for different reasons aren’t possible, becomes involuntarily childless. For those individuals could differently types of assisted reproduction be an alternative. In both cases medical procedures are done in the public healthcare and have different subventions from the state. But the common healthcare lacks resources and therefore distribution and priorities become necessary.Priorities are difficult and different ethical principles are established for guidance. Notwithstanding, priorities for family planning and the involuntarily childless are characterized with practical difficulties. This essay examines how two country councils have put decision of prioritization of family planning and treatment for involuntary childless in to practice. By looking at material from governmental decisions and reasonings this paper observes inequalities both between the councils but also between men and women. There is no consensus how the actual priorities should be realized and from whose perspective it should be done, from the individual or from the society. This is important both for the well-being of the individual but also for the legitimacy of the society.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA1/oai:DiVA.org:umu-180713 |
| Date | January 2020 |
| Creators | Eriksson, Felicia |
| Publisher | Umeå universitet, Enheten för ekonomisk historia |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | Swedish |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis, text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.0026 seconds