Abstract
AbstractIn 2003 and 2004, Aotearoa New Zealand enacted two key laws that regulate two very different ways in which the female body may be commodified. The Prostitution Reform Act 2003 (PRA) decriminalized prostitution, removing legal barriers to the buying and selling of commercial sexual services. The Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Act 2004 (HART Act), on the other hand, put a prohibition on commercial surrogacy agreements. This paper undertakes a comparative analysis of the ethical arguments underlying New Zealand’s legislative solutions to prostitution and commercial surrogacy. While the regulation of prostitution is approached with a Marxist feminist lens with the aim to ensure the health and safety of sex workers, commercial surrogacy is prohibited outright for concerns of negative impacts on present and future persons. I ground the principles of each Act in their ethical foundations and compare these two against one another. I conclude that New Zealand’s legislative approach to regulating the commodification of the female body is ethically inconsistent.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Health Policy,Health (social science)
Reference42 articles.
1. Abel, G., and L. Fitzgerald. 2008. On a fast-track into adulthood: An exploration of transitions into adulthood for street-based sex workers in New Zealand. Journal of Youth Studies 11(4): 361–376.
2. Abel, G., L. Fitzgerald, and C. Brunton. 2009. The impact of decriminalisation on the number of sex workers in New Zealand. Journal of Social Policy 38(3): 515–531.
3. Almond, B. 2006. The fragmenting family. Oxford: Oxford University Press
4. Anderson, L., J. Snelling, and H. Tomlins-Jahnke. 2012. The practice of surrogacy in New Zealand. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 52(3): 253–257.
5. Armstrong, L., and C. Fraser. 2020. The disclosure dilemma: Stigma and talking about sex work in the decriminalised context. In Sex work and the New Zealand model: Decriminalisation and social change, edited by L. Armstrong and G. Abel, 177–198. Bristol: Bristol University Press
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献