Moral frameworks of commercial surrogacy within the US, India and Russia.

India Russia USA clinical labour moral frameworks reproductive markets repronational histories surrogacy surrogate mothers

Journal

Sexual and reproductive health matters
ISSN: 2641-0397
Titre abrégé: Sex Reprod Health Matters
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101743493

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Dec 2021
Historique:
entrez: 1 3 2021
pubmed: 2 3 2021
medline: 29 10 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

In this paper, we draw on three ethnographic studies of surrogacy we carried out separately in different contexts: the western US state of California, the south Indian state of Karnataka, and the western Russian metropolis of St Petersburg. In our interviews with surrogate mothers, intended parents, and surrogacy professionals, we traced the meanings and ideologies through which they understood the clinical labour of surrogacy. We found that in the US, interviewed surrogates, intended parents and professionals understood surrogacy as an exchange of both gifts and commodities, where gift-giving, reciprocity, and relatedness between surrogates and intended parents were the major tropes. In India, differing narratives of surrogacy were offered by its different parties: whilst professionals and intended parents framed it as a win-win exchange with an emphasis on the economic side, the interviewed surrogate mothers talked about surrogacy as creative labour of giving life. In Russia, approaches to surrogacy among the interviewed surrogate mothers, professionals and intended parents overlapped in framing it as work and a businesslike commodity exchange. We suggest these three different ways of ethical reasoning about the clinical labour of surrogacy, including justifications of women's incorporation into this labour, were situated in local moral frameworks. We name them "repro-regional moral frameworks", inspired by earlier work on moral frameworks as well as on reproductive nationalisms and transnational reproduction. Building on these findings, we argue that any international or global regulation of surrogacy, or indeed any moral stance on it, needs to take these local differences into account.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33645464
doi: 10.1080/26410397.2021.1878674
pmc: PMC8009022
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

1-17

Subventions

Organisme : Wellcome Trust
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Wellcome Trust
ID : 209829/Z/17/Z
Pays : United Kingdom

Références

Reprod Biomed Soc Online. 2018 Nov 26;7:82-90
pubmed: 30766926
Reprod Biomed Soc Online. 2016 Nov 10;2:128-135
pubmed: 29892725
Anthropol Med. 2018 Dec;25(3):280-295
pubmed: 29927615
Birth. 2011 Jun;38(2):180-1
pubmed: 21599744
Reprod Health Matters. 2011 May;19(37):107-16
pubmed: 21555091
Anthropol Med. 2011 Apr;18(1):87-103
pubmed: 21563005
Dev World Bioeth. 2009 Dec;9(3):111-8
pubmed: 19508290
New Genet Soc. 2018 Dec 02;37(4):338-361
pubmed: 30679931

Auteurs

Marcin Smietana (M)

Professor, Department of Sociology, University of Texas, Austin, USA.

Sharmila Rudrappa (S)

Research Associate, ReproSoc, Cambridge University, Cambridge, UK. Correspondence: ms935@cam.ac.uk.

Christina Weis (C)

Research Fellow, Centre for Reproduction Research, De Montfort University, Leicester, UK.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH