About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

96 Minn. L. Rev. Headnotes 1 (2012)

handle is hein.journals/headnotpan96 and id is 1 raw text is: Reply A Response to Appleton and Pollak I. Glenn Cohen & Daniel L. Chent We view Professor Appleton and Professor Pollak's re- sponse to our article, Trading-Off Reproductive Technology and Adoption: Does Subsidizing IVF Decrease Adoption Rates and Should It Matter?, as complementary in two senses.1 First, they are extremely generous with their praise for our project, which is particularly gratifying given how important their own work has been in the field. Second, and perhaps more im- portantly, they suggest a number of new tangents and ideas prompted by our project. We first summarize those contribu- tions and how we think they fit with our Article. We then very briefly discuss a few instances where we might characterize what we have said differently than they do. Appleton and Pollak add a number of distinct contributions to what we have said. They nicely suggest that the rhetorical and legal relationship between embryo adoption and child adoption is worth further study.2 While one of us has written extensively about reproductive technologies and the legal and ethical issues they raise,3 neither in this paper nor in that prior t Copyright © 2012 by I. Glenn Cohen & Daniel L. Chen. 1. See I. Glenn Cohen & Daniel L. Chen, Trading-Off Reproductive Technology and Adoption: Does Subsidizing IVF Decrease Adoption Rates and Should It Matter?, 95 MINN. L. REV. 485 (2010). 2. Susan Frelich Appleton & Robert A. Pollak, Exploring the Connections Between Adoption and IVF: Twibling Analyses, 95 MINN. L. REV. HEADNOTES 60, 66-69 (2011), http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/ 05/Appleton-PollakPDF.pdf. 3. See, e.g., I. Glenn Cohen, Beyond Best Interests, 96 MINN. L. REV. (forthcoming 2012) (proposing substitutes for BIRC analysis); I. Glenn Cohen, Intentional Diminishment, The Non-Identity Problem, and Legal Liability, 60 HASTINGS L.J. 347 (2008) (discussing tort liability for parents who use repro- ductive technologies to intentionally produce disabled children); I. Glenn Co- hen, Regulating Reproduction: The Problem with Best Interests, 96 MINN. L. REV. 423 (forthcoming 2011) (problematizing best-interests-of-the-resulting- child (BIRC) analysis by examining it within the context of modern reproduc- tive technologies); I. Glenn Cohen, The Constitution and the Rights Not to Pro-

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most