Why commercial surrogate motherhood unethically commodifies women and children: Reply to McLachlan and Swales

Health Care Analysis

Volumn 8, Issue 1, 2000, Pages 19-26

  Anderson, Elizabeth S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

Brazier Report; Commercial Surrogate Motherhood; Commodification; Medical ethics; Surrogacy

Indexed keywords

CHILD WELFARE; COMMERCIAL PHENOMENA; ETHICS; HUMAN; ILLEGITIMACY; LEGAL ASPECT; MOTHER CHILD RELATION; PREGNANCY; REVIEW;

ANALYTICAL APPROACH; COMMODIFICATION; CONTRACTS; GENETICS AND REPRODUCTION; LEGAL APPROACH;

CHILD; COMMERCE; COMMODIFICATION; CONTRACTS; ETHICS, MEDICAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PREGNANCY; PUBLIC POLICY; SURROGATE MOTHERS;

EID: 0034068812     PISSN: 10653058     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1009477906883     Document Type: Review

References (4)

1. Anderson, E. (1993) Value in Ethics and Economics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
2. Kant, I. (1964) Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals (Trans. H.J. Paton). New York: Harper.
3. McLachlan, M.V. and Swales, J.K. (2000) Babies, Child Bearers and Commodification. Health Care Analysis (this issue).
4. Satz, D. (1992) Markets in Women's Reproductive Labor. Philosophy and Public Affairs 21, 107-131.