Inez Raes
Ghent University
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Inez Raes.
Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology | 2014
Inez Raes; Hanna Van Parys; Veerle Provoost; Ann Buysse; Petra De Sutter; Guido Pennings
Objective: In this qualitative study, we investigate how lesbian couples experience and deal with the difference in genetic relatedness in their family. Background: Previous research showed that lesbian couples handle the difference with regard to genetic relatedness by, for instance, creating a narrative about physical resemblances or by focusing on the social bond and its influence on children. Methods: The findings are based on qualitative in-depth interviews with 10 lesbian couples who had at least one donor-conceived child aged 7–10. Results: The difference with regard to the genetic link brought up complex and context-specific experiences for these parents. Generally, the genetic link was described as irrelevant: equality between both parents was presented as a given. However, some experiences of difference due to the presence of one genetic link were found. In these accounts, the genetic link was described as a valuable extra that created an inequality between them as parents. Conclusion: The findings show that these mothers have a complex attitude towards genetic relatedness.
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry | 2016
Inez Raes; An Ravelingien; Guido Pennings
It is widely agreed among health professionals that couples using donor insemination should be offered counselling on the topic of donor conception disclosure. However, it is clear from the literature that there has long been a lack of agreement about which counselling approach should be used in this case: a directive or a non-directive approach. In this paper we investigate which approach is ethically justifiable by balancing the two underlying principles of autonomy (non-directive approach) and beneficence (directive approach). To overrule one principle in favour of another, six conditions should be fulfilled. We analyse the arguments in favour of the beneficence principle, and consequently, a directive approach. This analysis shows that two conditions are not met; the principle of autonomy should not be overridden. Therefore, at this moment, a directive counselling approach on donor conception disclosure cannot be ethically justified.
Human Reproduction | 2013
Inez Raes; An Ravelingien; Guido Pennings
Facts, views & vision in obgyn | 2015
Inez Raes; Van Parys H; Provoost; Ann Buysse; De Sutter P; Guido Pennings
Archive | 2015
Inez Raes
31th conference of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology, Abstracts | 2015
An Ravelingien; Veerle Provoost; Hanna Van Parys; Isabelle Stuyver; Inez Raes; Sara Somers; Elia Wyverkens; Ann Buysse; Petra De Sutter
29th conference of the European Society for Philosophy of Medicine and Healthcare, Abstracts | 2015
Hanna Van Parys; Veerle Provoost; Elia Wyverkens; Inez Raes; An Ravelingien; Sara Somers; Isabelle Stuyver; Guido Pennings; Petra De Sutter; Ann Buysse
29th conference of the European Society for Philosophy of Medicine and Healthcare, Abstracts | 2015
Sara Somers; An Ravelingien; Veerle Provoost; Inez Raes; Hanna Van Parys; Elia Wyverkens; Isabelle Stuyver; Ann Buysse; Guido Pennings; Petra De Sutter
29th conference of the European Society for Philosophy of Medicine and Healthcare, Abstracts | 2015
Elia Wyverkens; Hanna Van Parys; Veerle Provoost; Inez Raes; An Ravelingien; Sara Somers; Isabelle Stuyver; Guido Pennings; Petra De Sutter; Ann Buysse
Tijdschrift Voor Geneeskunde | 2014
Inez Raes; An Ravelingien; Guido Pennings