sh.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • harvard-anglia-ruskin-university
  • apa-old-doi-prefix.csl
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Autonomy in altruistic surrogacy, conflicting kinship grammars and intentional multilineal kinship
Södertörn University, School of Historical and Contemporary Studies, Ethnology. Södertörn University, Centre for Baltic and East European Studies (CBEES). (Historiska studier)ORCID iD: 0000-0001-7764-6326
2018 (English)In: Reproductive Biomedicine Online, ISSN 1472-6483, E-ISSN 1472-6491, Vol. 7, p. 66-75Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Since 1982, when the first baby conceived by in-vitro fertilization (IVF) in Sweden was born, Swedish legislation on assisted reproduction has gradually become more liberal and inclusive. Today, gamete donation and IVF are permitted not only for heterosexual couples, but also for lesbian couples and single women, and embryo donation is expected to become legalized shortly which will further increase the chances for involuntarily childless people to become parents. In recent years, the possibility of allowing surrogacy has been debated increasingly, with strongly polarized arguments both for and against it. Recent reports by the Swedish National Council of Medical Ethics and a governmental investigation agreed that the possibilities for involuntarily childless people should be increased in several ways, but reached opposing conclusions concerning surrogacy. While the former argued in favour of it (in certain circumstances), the latter argued against it (in all circumstances). One difference in their argumentation centred around the issue of bodily autonomy and self-determination in surrogacy. These two opposing conclusions raise crucial questions about what the principle of reproductive intent implies for questions concerning reproductive autonomy in surrogacy. Does it matter when in the reproductive process the declaration of intent is made, and what happens if we consider the possibility of changing intentions in relation to autonomy and self-determination in surrogacy? Is the mater est rule compatible with an intersectional, queer and non-discriminatory approach to reproductive justice, and if so, under what circumstances? Are there any possibilities of thinking beyond the ‘either/or’ between these two principles?

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2018. Vol. 7, p. 66-75
Keywords [en]
surrogacy, kinship, autonomy, self-determination, kinship grammars, queer kinship
National Category
Ethnology Social Sciences Interdisciplinary
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:sh:diva-36778DOI: 10.1016/j.rbms.2018.10.014PubMedID: 30740547OAI: oai:DiVA.org:sh-36778DiVA, id: diva2:1263522
Funder
The Foundation for Baltic and East European StudiesAvailable from: 2018-11-15 Created: 2018-11-15 Last updated: 2019-02-28Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedPMC Full text

Authority records BETA

Gunnarsson Payne, Jenny

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Gunnarsson Payne, Jenny
By organisation
EthnologyCentre for Baltic and East European Studies (CBEES)
In the same journal
Reproductive Biomedicine Online
EthnologySocial Sciences Interdisciplinary

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 103 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • harvard-anglia-ruskin-university
  • apa-old-doi-prefix.csl
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf