The exploitation argument against commercial surrogacy

Bioethics

Volumn 17, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 169-187

  Wilkinson, Stephen ^a  

^a KEELE UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMMERCIAL PHENOMENA; HEALTH SERVICE; LAW; MEDICAL ETHICS; MORALITY; VICTIM;

EID: 0037386627     PISSN: 02699702     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/1467-8519.00331     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. L. Andrews. Surrogate Motherhood: the challenge for feminists. Law Medicine and Health Care 1988; 16; 74.
2. These and similar arguments are all widely discussed in the literature. See for example: E. Anderson. Is Women's Labour a Commodity? Philosophy and Public Affairs 1990; 19; 71-92. G. Annas. Death without dignity for commercial surrogacy: the case of Baby M. Hastings Center Report 1988; 18; 21-24. R. Ber. Ethical Issues in Gestational Surrogacy. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 2000; 21; 153-169. R. Arneson. Commodification and Commercial Surrogacy. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 132-164. B. Brecher. Surrogacy and its Consequences: some misgivings. Explorations in Knowledge 1988; 15; 17-25. N. Duxbury. Do markets degrade? Modern Law Review 1996; 59; 331-356. N. Duxbury. Law, Markets and Valuation. Brooklyn Law Review 1995; 61; 657-701. C. Erin & J. Harris. Surrogacy. Bailliere's Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1991; 5; 611-635. J. Glover. 1989. Fertility and the Family: the Glover Report on Reproduction Technologies to the European Commission. London. Fourth Estates. J. Harris. 1985. The Value of Life. London. Routledge. M. Radin. Market Inalienability. Harvard Law Review 1987; 100; 1849-1937. D. Satz. Markets in Women's Reproductive Labour. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 107-131. A. Wertheimer. Two Questions About Surrogacy and Exploitation. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 71-92.
3. These and similar arguments are all widely discussed in the literature. See for example: E. Anderson. Is Women's Labour a Commodity? Philosophy and Public Affairs 1990; 19; 71-92. G. Annas. Death without dignity for commercial surrogacy: the case of Baby M. Hastings Center Report 1988; 18; 21-24. R. Ber. Ethical Issues in Gestational Surrogacy. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 2000; 21; 153-169. R. Arneson. Commodification and Commercial Surrogacy. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 132-164. B. Brecher. Surrogacy and its Consequences: some misgivings. Explorations in Knowledge 1988; 15; 17-25. N. Duxbury. Do markets degrade? Modern Law Review 1996; 59; 331-356. N. Duxbury. Law, Markets and Valuation. Brooklyn Law Review 1995; 61; 657-701. C. Erin & J. Harris. Surrogacy. Bailliere's Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1991; 5; 611-635. J. Glover. 1989. Fertility and the Family: the Glover Report on Reproduction Technologies to the European Commission. London. Fourth Estates. J. Harris. 1985. The Value of Life. London. Routledge. M. Radin. Market Inalienability. Harvard Law Review 1987; 100; 1849-1937. D. Satz. Markets in Women's Reproductive Labour. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 107-131. A. Wertheimer. Two Questions About Surrogacy and Exploitation. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 71-92.
4. These and similar arguments are all widely discussed in the literature. See for example: E. Anderson. Is Women's Labour a Commodity? Philosophy and Public Affairs 1990; 19; 71-92. G. Annas. Death without dignity for commercial surrogacy: the case of Baby M. Hastings Center Report 1988; 18; 21-24. R. Ber. Ethical Issues in Gestational Surrogacy. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 2000; 21; 153-169. R. Arneson. Commodification and Commercial Surrogacy. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 132-164. B. Brecher. Surrogacy and its Consequences: some misgivings. Explorations in Knowledge 1988; 15; 17-25. N. Duxbury. Do markets degrade? Modern Law Review 1996; 59; 331-356. N. Duxbury. Law, Markets and Valuation. Brooklyn Law Review 1995; 61; 657-701. C. Erin & J. Harris. Surrogacy. Bailliere's Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1991; 5; 611-635. J. Glover. 1989. Fertility and the Family: the Glover Report on Reproduction Technologies to the European Commission. London. Fourth Estates. J. Harris. 1985. The Value of Life. London. Routledge. M. Radin. Market Inalienability. Harvard Law Review 1987; 100; 1849-1937. D. Satz. Markets in Women's Reproductive Labour. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 107-131. A. Wertheimer. Two Questions About Surrogacy and Exploitation. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 71-92.
5. These and similar arguments are all widely discussed in the literature. See for example: E. Anderson. Is Women's Labour a Commodity? Philosophy and Public Affairs 1990; 19; 71-92. G. Annas. Death without dignity for commercial surrogacy: the case of Baby M. Hastings Center Report 1988; 18; 21-24. R. Ber. Ethical Issues in Gestational Surrogacy. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 2000; 21; 153-169. R. Arneson. Commodification and Commercial Surrogacy. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 132-164. B. Brecher. Surrogacy and its Consequences: some misgivings. Explorations in Knowledge 1988; 15; 17-25. N. Duxbury. Do markets degrade? Modern Law Review 1996; 59; 331-356. N. Duxbury. Law, Markets and Valuation. Brooklyn Law Review 1995; 61; 657-701. C. Erin & J. Harris. Surrogacy. Bailliere's Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1991; 5; 611-635. J. Glover. 1989. Fertility and the Family: the Glover Report on Reproduction Technologies to the European Commission. London. Fourth Estates. J. Harris. 1985. The Value of Life. London. Routledge. M. Radin. Market Inalienability. Harvard Law Review 1987; 100; 1849-1937. D. Satz. Markets in Women's Reproductive Labour. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 107-131. A. Wertheimer. Two Questions About Surrogacy and Exploitation. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 71-92.
6. These and similar arguments are all widely discussed in the literature. See for example: E. Anderson. Is Women's Labour a Commodity? Philosophy and Public Affairs 1990; 19; 71-92. G. Annas. Death without dignity for commercial surrogacy: the case of Baby M. Hastings Center Report 1988; 18; 21-24. R. Ber. Ethical Issues in Gestational Surrogacy. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 2000; 21; 153-169. R. Arneson. Commodification and Commercial Surrogacy. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 132-164. B. Brecher. Surrogacy and its Consequences: some misgivings. Explorations in Knowledge 1988; 15; 17-25. N. Duxbury. Do markets degrade? Modern Law Review 1996; 59; 331-356. N. Duxbury. Law, Markets and Valuation. Brooklyn Law Review 1995; 61; 657-701. C. Erin & J. Harris. Surrogacy. Bailliere's Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1991; 5; 611-635. J. Glover. 1989. Fertility and the Family: the Glover Report on Reproduction Technologies to the European Commission. London. Fourth Estates. J. Harris. 1985. The Value of Life. London. Routledge. M. Radin. Market Inalienability. Harvard Law Review 1987; 100; 1849-1937. D. Satz. Markets in Women's Reproductive Labour. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 107-131. A. Wertheimer. Two Questions About Surrogacy and Exploitation. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 71-92.
7. These and similar arguments are all widely discussed in the literature. See for example: E. Anderson. Is Women's Labour a Commodity? Philosophy and Public Affairs 1990; 19; 71-92. G. Annas. Death without dignity for commercial surrogacy: the case of Baby M. Hastings Center Report 1988; 18; 21-24. R. Ber. Ethical Issues in Gestational Surrogacy. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 2000; 21; 153-169. R. Arneson. Commodification and Commercial Surrogacy. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 132-164. B. Brecher. Surrogacy and its Consequences: some misgivings. Explorations in Knowledge 1988; 15; 17-25. N. Duxbury. Do markets degrade? Modern Law Review 1996; 59; 331-356. N. Duxbury. Law, Markets and Valuation. Brooklyn Law Review 1995; 61; 657-701. C. Erin & J. Harris. Surrogacy. Bailliere's Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1991; 5; 611-635. J. Glover. 1989. Fertility and the Family: the Glover Report on Reproduction Technologies to the European Commission. London. Fourth Estates. J. Harris. 1985. The Value of Life. London. Routledge. M. Radin. Market Inalienability. Harvard Law Review 1987; 100; 1849-1937. D. Satz. Markets in Women's Reproductive Labour. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 107-131. A. Wertheimer. Two Questions About Surrogacy and Exploitation. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 71-92.
8. These and similar arguments are all widely discussed in the literature. See for example: E. Anderson. Is Women's Labour a Commodity? Philosophy and Public Affairs 1990; 19; 71-92. G. Annas. Death without dignity for commercial surrogacy: the case of Baby M. Hastings Center Report 1988; 18; 21-24. R. Ber. Ethical Issues in Gestational Surrogacy. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 2000; 21; 153-169. R. Arneson. Commodification and Commercial Surrogacy. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 132-164. B. Brecher. Surrogacy and its Consequences: some misgivings. Explorations in Knowledge 1988; 15; 17-25. N. Duxbury. Do markets degrade? Modern Law Review 1996; 59; 331-356. N. Duxbury. Law, Markets and Valuation. Brooklyn Law Review 1995; 61; 657-701. C. Erin & J. Harris. Surrogacy. Bailliere's Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1991; 5; 611-635. J. Glover. 1989. Fertility and the Family: the Glover Report on Reproduction Technologies to the European Commission. London. Fourth Estates. J. Harris. 1985. The Value of Life. London. Routledge. M. Radin. Market Inalienability. Harvard Law Review 1987; 100; 1849-1937. D. Satz. Markets in Women's Reproductive Labour. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 107-131. A. Wertheimer. Two Questions About Surrogacy and Exploitation. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 71-92.
9. These and similar arguments are all widely discussed in the literature. See for example: E. Anderson. Is Women's Labour a Commodity? Philosophy and Public Affairs 1990; 19; 71-92. G. Annas. Death without dignity for commercial surrogacy: the case of Baby M. Hastings Center Report 1988; 18; 21-24. R. Ber. Ethical Issues in Gestational Surrogacy. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 2000; 21; 153-169. R. Arneson. Commodification and Commercial Surrogacy. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 132-164. B. Brecher. Surrogacy and its Consequences: some misgivings. Explorations in Knowledge 1988; 15; 17-25. N. Duxbury. Do markets degrade? Modern Law Review 1996; 59; 331-356. N. Duxbury. Law, Markets and Valuation. Brooklyn Law Review 1995; 61; 657-701. C. Erin & J. Harris. Surrogacy. Bailliere's Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1991; 5; 611-635. J. Glover. 1989. Fertility and the Family: the Glover Report on Reproduction Technologies to the European Commission. London. Fourth Estates. J. Harris. 1985. The Value of Life. London. Routledge. M. Radin. Market Inalienability. Harvard Law Review 1987; 100; 1849-1937. D. Satz. Markets in Women's Reproductive Labour. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 107-131. A. Wertheimer. Two Questions About Surrogacy and Exploitation. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 71-92.
10. These and similar arguments are all widely discussed in the literature. See for example: E. Anderson. Is Women's Labour a Commodity? Philosophy and Public Affairs 1990; 19; 71-92. G. Annas. Death without dignity for commercial surrogacy: the case of Baby M. Hastings Center Report 1988; 18; 21-24. R. Ber. Ethical Issues in Gestational Surrogacy. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 2000; 21; 153-169. R. Arneson. Commodification and Commercial Surrogacy. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 132-164. B. Brecher. Surrogacy and its Consequences: some misgivings. Explorations in Knowledge 1988; 15; 17-25. N. Duxbury. Do markets degrade? Modern Law Review 1996; 59; 331-356. N. Duxbury. Law, Markets and Valuation. Brooklyn Law Review 1995; 61; 657-701. C. Erin & J. Harris. Surrogacy. Bailliere's Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1991; 5; 611-635. J. Glover. 1989. Fertility and the Family: the Glover Report on Reproduction Technologies to the European Commission. London. Fourth Estates. J. Harris. 1985. The Value of Life. London. Routledge. M. Radin. Market Inalienability. Harvard Law Review 1987; 100; 1849-1937. D. Satz. Markets in Women's Reproductive Labour. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 107-131. A. Wertheimer. Two Questions About Surrogacy and Exploitation. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 71-92.
11. These and similar arguments are all widely discussed in the literature. See for example: E. Anderson. Is Women's Labour a Commodity? Philosophy and Public Affairs 1990; 19; 71-92. G. Annas. Death without dignity for commercial surrogacy: the case of Baby M. Hastings Center Report 1988; 18; 21-24. R. Ber. Ethical Issues in Gestational Surrogacy. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 2000; 21; 153-169. R. Arneson. Commodification and Commercial Surrogacy. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 132-164. B. Brecher. Surrogacy and its Consequences: some misgivings. Explorations in Knowledge 1988; 15; 17-25. N. Duxbury. Do markets degrade? Modern Law Review 1996; 59; 331-356. N. Duxbury. Law, Markets and Valuation. Brooklyn Law Review 1995; 61; 657-701. C. Erin & J. Harris. Surrogacy. Bailliere's Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1991; 5; 611-635. J. Glover. 1989. Fertility and the Family: the Glover Report on Reproduction Technologies to the European Commission. London. Fourth Estates. J. Harris. 1985. The Value of Life. London. Routledge. M. Radin. Market Inalienability. Harvard Law Review 1987; 100; 1849-1937. D. Satz. Markets in Women's Reproductive Labour. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 107-131. A. Wertheimer. Two Questions About Surrogacy and Exploitation. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 71-92.
12. These and similar arguments are all widely discussed in the literature. See for example: E. Anderson. Is Women's Labour a Commodity? Philosophy and Public Affairs 1990; 19; 71-92. G. Annas. Death without dignity for commercial surrogacy: the case of Baby M. Hastings Center Report 1988; 18; 21-24. R. Ber. Ethical Issues in Gestational Surrogacy. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 2000; 21; 153-169. R. Arneson. Commodification and Commercial Surrogacy. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 132-164. B. Brecher. Surrogacy and its Consequences: some misgivings. Explorations in Knowledge 1988; 15; 17-25. N. Duxbury. Do markets degrade? Modern Law Review 1996; 59; 331-356. N. Duxbury. Law, Markets and Valuation. Brooklyn Law Review 1995; 61; 657-701. C. Erin & J. Harris. Surrogacy. Bailliere's Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1991; 5; 611-635. J. Glover. 1989. Fertility and the Family: the Glover Report on Reproduction Technologies to the European Commission. London. Fourth Estates. J. Harris. 1985. The Value of Life. London. Routledge. M. Radin. Market Inalienability. Harvard Law Review 1987; 100; 1849-1937. D. Satz. Markets in Women's Reproductive Labour. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 107-131. A. Wertheimer. Two Questions About Surrogacy and Exploitation. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 71-92.
13. These and similar arguments are all widely discussed in the literature. See for example: E. Anderson. Is Women's Labour a Commodity? Philosophy and Public Affairs 1990; 19; 71-92. G. Annas. Death without dignity for commercial surrogacy: the case of Baby M. Hastings Center Report 1988; 18; 21-24. R. Ber. Ethical Issues in Gestational Surrogacy. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 2000; 21; 153-169. R. Arneson. Commodification and Commercial Surrogacy. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 132-164. B. Brecher. Surrogacy and its Consequences: some misgivings. Explorations in Knowledge 1988; 15; 17-25. N. Duxbury. Do markets degrade? Modern Law Review 1996; 59; 331-356. N. Duxbury. Law, Markets and Valuation. Brooklyn Law Review 1995; 61; 657-701. C. Erin & J. Harris. Surrogacy. Bailliere's Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1991; 5; 611-635. J. Glover. 1989. Fertility and the Family: the Glover Report on Reproduction Technologies to the European Commission. London. Fourth Estates. J. Harris. 1985. The Value of Life. London. Routledge. M. Radin. Market Inalienability. Harvard Law Review 1987; 100; 1849-1937. D. Satz. Markets in Women's Reproductive Labour. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 107-131. A. Wertheimer. Two Questions About Surrogacy and Exploitation. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 71-92.
14. These and similar arguments are all widely discussed in the literature. See for example: E. Anderson. Is Women's Labour a Commodity? Philosophy and Public Affairs 1990; 19; 71-92. G. Annas. Death without dignity for commercial surrogacy: the case of Baby M. Hastings Center Report 1988; 18; 21-24. R. Ber. Ethical Issues in Gestational Surrogacy. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 2000; 21; 153-169. R. Arneson. Commodification and Commercial Surrogacy. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 132-164. B. Brecher. Surrogacy and its Consequences: some misgivings. Explorations in Knowledge 1988; 15; 17-25. N. Duxbury. Do markets degrade? Modern Law Review 1996; 59; 331-356. N. Duxbury. Law, Markets and Valuation. Brooklyn Law Review 1995; 61; 657-701. C. Erin & J. Harris. Surrogacy. Bailliere's Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1991; 5; 611-635. J. Glover. 1989. Fertility and the Family: the Glover Report on Reproduction Technologies to the European Commission. London. Fourth Estates. J. Harris. 1985. The Value of Life. London. Routledge. M. Radin. Market Inalienability. Harvard Law Review 1987; 100; 1849-1937. D. Satz. Markets in Women's Reproductive Labour. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 107-131. A. Wertheimer. Two Questions About Surrogacy and Exploitation. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1992; 21; 71-92.
15. In making this distinction, I am very much in line with philosophical orthodoxy, as identified and criticised by Wood: 'Most philosophers who reflect on the concept of exploitation tend to follow the practice of dictionaries, distinguishing a "non-moral" sense of "exploitation" from a "moral" sense, and taking the latter sense to involve the idea of making use of someone or something unjustly or unethically. Since they suppose that it is only the latter "pejorative" meaning of the term which interests social critics, they provide what I⋯call a "moralized" account of exploitation. That is, they suppose that the term "exploitation" (in the "pejorative" sense) already has wrongfulness built into its very meaning.' A. Wood. Exploitation. Social Philosophy and Policy 1995; 12; 137.
16. J. Schwartz. What's wrong with exploitation? Nous 1995; 29; 176. See also: J. Feinberg. 1988. Harmless Wrongdoing. New York. Oxford University Press: 177.
17. J. Schwartz. What's wrong with exploitation? Nous 1995; 29; 176. See also: J. Feinberg. 1988. Harmless Wrongdoing. New York. Oxford University Press: 177.
18. M. Warnock. 1985. A Question of Life: the Warnock Report on Human Fertilisation and Embryology. Oxford. Blackwell: para. 8.17.
19. Harris makes a very similar distinction between 'two differing conceptions of the same concept of exploitation': one involving 'the idea of wrongful use', the other involving 'some disparity in the value of an exchange of goods or services.' See J. Harris. 1993. Wonderwoman and Superman: the ethics of human biotechnology. Oxford. Oxford University Press: 120.
20. Although the sole concern of this paper is commercial surrogacy, much of the discussion will be relevant to other debates such as the one concerning organ sale.
21. S. Wilkinson. Commodification arguments for the legal prohibition of organ sale. Health Care Analysis 2000; 8; 189-201. Reprinted in Applied Ethics (Volume 3: Ethical issues in medicine, technology and the life sciences II). R. Chadwick & D. Schroeder, eds. London: Routledge: 187-199. S. Wilkinson. 2003. Bodies for Sale. London. Routledge.
22. S. Wilkinson. Commodification arguments for the legal prohibition of organ sale. Health Care Analysis 2000; 8; 189-201. Reprinted in Applied Ethics (Volume 3: Ethical issues in medicine, technology and the life sciences II). R. Chadwick & D. Schroeder, eds. London: Routledge: 187-199. S. Wilkinson. 2003. Bodies for Sale. London. Routledge.
23. S. Wilkinson. Commodification arguments for the legal prohibition of organ sale. Health Care Analysis 2000; 8; 189-201. Reprinted in Applied Ethics (Volume 3: Ethical issues in medicine, technology and the life sciences II). R. Chadwick & D. Schroeder, eds. London: Routledge: 187-199. S. Wilkinson. 2003. Bodies for Sale. London. Routledge.
24. Wertheimer, op. cit. note 2, p. 213.
25. Wertheimer later rejects the view that a 'defect in choice' is an essential part of exploitation. Wertheimer, op. cit. note 2, p. 229.
26. The correct account of exploitation is in fact much more complicated than this, although not in ways that affect the issues considered here. See: Wilkinson, op. cit. note 8, chapters 2 and 3.
27. Wertheimer, op. cit. note 2, p. 229.
28. Wertheimer, op. cit. note 2, p. 229.
29. Wood, op. cit. note 3, p. 149.
30. Wood, op. cit. note 3, p. 148.
31. Wertheimer, op. cit. note 2, p. 226.
32. Wertheimer, op. cit. note 2, p. 225.
33. Wertheimer, op. cit. note 2, p. 225.
34. I b i d.
35. R. Nozick. 1969. Coercion. In Philosophy Science and Method. S. Morgenbesser, P. Suppes & M. White, eds. New York. St Martin's Press: 447.
36. Wertheimer, op. cit. note 2, p. 226.
37. Or as Wertheimer puts it: 'A actually proposes to make B worse off⋯relative to what B has a right to expect from A'. Wertheimer, op. cit. note 2, p. 226.
38. For the sake of brevity, I shall focus just on the commissioning parents as potential exploiters. There are however other possible exploiters: e.g. agencies, or even surrogates themselves in certain circumstances.
39. This kind of issue is one of the main concerns of the UK's 'Brazier Report.' See: M. Brazier, A. Campbell & S. Golombok. 1998. Surrogacy: review for health ministers of current arrangements for payments and regulation. London. The Stationary Office.
40. Warnock, op. cit. note 5, para. 8.12.
41. Anderson, op. cit. note 2, p. 238.
42. Wertheimer, op. cit. note 2, p. 217.
43. The view that commercial surrogacy is 'baby selling' is widespread and appears, for example, in the 'Warnock Report': 'a surrogacy agreement is degrading to the child who is to be the outcome of it, since, for all practical purposes, the child will have been bought for money'. Warnock, op. cit. note 5, para. 8.11.
44. For discussions of whether or not commercial surrogacy is baby selling see (e.g.): Andrews, op. cit. note 1. G. Annas. Baby M: babies (and justice) for sale. Hastings Center Report 1987; 17; 13-15. R. Kornegay. Is Commercial Surrogacy Baby-Selling? Journal of Applied Philosophy 1990; 7; 45-50. Wilkinson, op. cit. note 8, chapter 8.
45. For discussions of whether or not commercial surrogacy is baby selling see (e.g.): Andrews, op. cit. note 1. G. Annas. Baby M: babies (and justice) for sale. Hastings Center Report 1987; 17; 13-15. R. Kornegay. Is Commercial Surrogacy Baby-Selling? Journal of Applied Philosophy 1990; 7; 45-50. Wilkinson, op. cit. note 8, chapter 8.
46. For discussions of whether or not commercial surrogacy is baby selling see (e.g.): Andrews, op. cit. note 1. G. Annas. Baby M: babies (and justice) for sale. Hastings Center Report 1987; 17; 13-15. R. Kornegay. Is Commercial Surrogacy Baby-Selling? Journal of Applied Philosophy 1990; 7; 45-50. Wilkinson, op. cit. note 8, chapter 8.
47. For discussions of whether or not commercial surrogacy is baby selling see (e.g.): Andrews, op. cit. note 1. G. Annas. Baby M: babies (and justice) for sale. Hastings Center Report 1987; 17; 13-15. R. Kornegay. Is Commercial Surrogacy Baby-Selling? Journal of Applied Philosophy 1990; 7; 45-50. Wilkinson, op. cit. note 8, chapter 8.
48. Interestingly, this seems to be the view taken by the authors of the UK's 'Brazier report', who suggest that the main reason why payment generates exploitation is that it may constitute 'undue pressure': 'payment of a surrogate by a commissioning couple to bear a child for them creates a potentially exploitative situation⋯the absence of payment would reduce the likelihood of undue pressure being placed on the surrogate mother.' Brazier et al., op. cit. note 5, para. 5.16.
49. B. Brecher. 1987. Liberal Individualism and the Moral Climate. In Moral Philosophy and Contemporary Problems. J. Evans, ed. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press: 195.
50. See, for example: R. Posner. The Ethics and Economics of Surrogate Motherhood. Journal of Contemporary Health Law and Policy 1989; 5; 21-29.
51. Harris makes a similar point about prostitution: 'Those who regard prostitution or surrogacy as exploitative per se ... rely on ... the hidden assumption that because no one would voluntarily choose to be a prostitute whatever the level of remuneration, the choice cannot be autonomous.' Harris, op. cit. note 6, p. 125.
52. Often, legislative attempts to prevent the commercialisation of surrogacy focus on intermediaries rather than on surrogates and commissioners. The UK's Surrogacy Arrangements Act 1985, for example, prevents surrogacy agencies from profiting from surrogacy arrangements without criminalising commercial surrogacy per se. Nonetheless, the ban on commercial agencies does make it much harder for British women to become paid surrogates and can therefore be viewed as 'legislative discouragement' of commercial surrogacy itself
53. Freeman interestingly describes this legislation as 'an ill-considered and largely irrelevant panic measure', writing: 'There are few better modern examples of morally panicked legislation than the 1985 [Surrogacy Arrangements] Act (one MP said it 'rightly outlaw[ed] the hell and wickedness that exists in America - where women are exploited and handled in an undignified manner for gain).' M. Freeman. 1989. Is surrogacy exploitative? In Legal Issues in Human Reproduction. S. McLean, ed. Aldershot. Dartmouth: 165. M. Freeman. Does surrogacy have a future after Brazier? Medical Law Review 1999; 7; 2.
54. Freeman interestingly describes this legislation as 'an ill-considered and largely irrelevant panic measure', writing: 'There are few better modern examples of morally panicked legislation than the 1985 [Surrogacy Arrangements] Act (one MP said it 'rightly outlaw[ed] the hell and wickedness that exists in America - where women are exploited and handled in an undignified manner for gain).' M. Freeman. 1989. Is surrogacy exploitative? In Legal Issues in Human Reproduction. S. McLean, ed. Aldershot. Dartmouth: 165. M. Freeman. Does surrogacy have a future after Brazier? Medical Law Review 1999; 7; 2.
55. Posner, op. cit. note 30, p. 255.
56. Laura Purdy notes that 'poor women now face substantial risks in the workplace. Even a superficial survey of the hazards in occupations available to poor women would give pause to those who would prohibit surrogacy on grounds of risk.' L. Purdy. Surrogate Mothering: exploitation or empowerment? Bioethics 1989; 3; 32.
57. Harris, op. cit. note 6, p. 132.
58. I would like to thank Professor Anne Donchin and Professor Derek Morgan for their useful referees' comments. In addition, a number of people have provided helpful critiques of previous versions of this paper (and related material) spanning its 'evolution' over several years. These include Bob Brecher, Angus Dawson, Heather Draper, Eve Garrard, John Harris, David McNaughton, David Resnik, Sally Sheldon, and Adrian Walsh. This list however is almost certainly not complete and I apologise to anyone who I have inadvertently failed to mention.