Born Without Asking

A closer look at consent and the ethics of procreation

Anti-natalism is the view that procreation is morally wrong (or, at least, that one should not procreate). It has nothing to do with hating humans, or babies, or whatnot. There are several different kinds of arguments for anti-natalism, and a minor one has to do with the idea of consent. I argue here that there is good reason to doubt each of the premises in the argument, and hence the conclusion should hold no force for one who does not already believe it.

Here is the consent-based anti-natalist argument:

1. If one does something to another without their consent and there is no overriding moral reason, then one has done something morally wrong.

2. Giving birth is done without the consent of the one being born.

3. There is no overriding moral reason to give birth in individual cases.

4. So, giving birth in individual cases is morally wrong.

Someone scolding you

In the literature, David Benatar has mentioned in passing a consent-style argument, and feminist philosophers or ethicists have mentioned this as well (cf. Elizabeth Harman, though her ideas are developed into an argument about harms, specifically).

There are decent reasons one might think each of the premises is true. With respect to (1), it seems at least intuitive to think that if you strike someone, there is no consent, and there is no morally overriding reason such that it would be justified, then you have thereby done something wrong. It also preserves things like emergency life-saving surgery (since there we do take saving life to be a morally overriding reason, all things equal).

For (2), it seems prima facie obvious that the one being born isn’t consenting; they are not even the kind of things (yet) that are able to give consent. You can even apply this to conception, if you would like, and you get the same result.

Baby saying “I don't consent!”

One might argue at first against (3) with the idea that there is a kind of good with the human race existing as a whole, and that this overall good could in principle be an overriding moral reason for giving birth without consent. But even if you accept this reasoning, (3) is constructed to deal with individual cases. And while individually one can help the human race survive, for the vast majority of people it simply isn’t going to be the case that their giving birth is a necessary or sufficient condition for continuing the human race (e.g., preventing its extinction). And (4) follows from the logically valid structure.

Yet, there are good reasons to think each of the three premises are either false or have not been established.