1 Department of Political Science, Aarhus BSS, Aarhus University2 Department of Political Science, Aarhus BSS, Aarhus University
This article provides a normative discussion of the political debate on public funded fertility-treatment in Denmark. It shows that especially three normative considerations attract attention in the debate. In the early part of the debate (1996) many Danish politicians weigh highly the moral importance of naturalness suggesting that fertility-treatment procedures be kept as close to natural fertilization as possible, and the interest of the child. The article argues that due to conceptual and normative problems, we should not take the idea of naturalness into account in political debates, and due to Parfit’s non-identity problem the interest of the child is irrelevant to such political debates. In the late part of the debate (2010) the question of whether infertility entails compensation-entitlement becomes crucial. Drawing on insights of political philosophy, the article suggests two moral principles, the functioning based and the responsibility-sensitivity principle, that both independently and together support the conclusion that people suffering the disadvantage of being infertile is in fact entitled to public funded compensation. The article concludes that it is morally unacceptable to deny infertile persons the possibility of fertility-treatment.