Assisted reproduction and the courts: The case of California

Journal of Family Issues

Volumn 27, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 464-482

  Maule, Linda S ^a   Schmid, Karen ^a  

^a INDIANA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Assisted reproduction; Family policy; Parenthood; Reproductive technology

Indexed keywords

EID: 33646726220     PISSN: 0192513X     EISSN: 15525481     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0192513X05283984     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. Adoption of Matthew B., 232 Cal. App. 3d 1239 (1991).
2. Andrews, L. (1992, October). Surrogacy wars: A scoreboard. California Lawyer, pp. 50-60.
3. Annas, G. J. (2000a). The shadowlands: The regulation of human reproduction in the United States. In S. N. Katz, J. Eekelaar, & M. Maclean (Eds.), Cross currents: Family law and policy in the United States and England (pp. 143-164). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
4. Annas, G. J. (2000b). Ulysses and the fate of frozen embryos: Reproduction, research, or destruction? New England Journal of Medicine, 343, 373-376.
5. Apple, R. D., & Golden, J. (Eds.). (1997). Mothers and motherhood: Readings in American history. Columbus: The Ohio State University Press.
6. Bogenschneider, K. (2000). Has family policy come of age? A decade review of the state of U.S. family policy in the 1990s. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, 1136-1159.
7. Boss, P. G. (1988). Family stress management. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
8. Brill, L. A. (1999). When will the law catch up? Catholic Lawyer, 39, 241-268.
9. Bubolz, M. M., & Sontag, M. S. (1993). Human ecology theory. In P. G. Boss, W. G. Doherty, R. LaRossa, W. R. Schumm, & S. K. Stienmetz (Eds.), Sourcebook of family theories and methods: A contextual approach (pp. 419-448). New York: Plenum.
10. Buzzanca v. Buzzanca, Cal. App. 4th 1410 (1998).
11. Callahan, J. C. (Ed.). (1995). Reproduction, ethics, and the law: Feminist perspectives. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
12. Coontz, S. (1997). The way we really are: Coming to terms with America's changing families. New York: Basic Books.
13. Cooper, S., & Glazer, E. (2000). Choices and challenges: The psychosocial aspects of the new reproductive technologies. In S. L. Crockin (Ed.), Adoptionand reproductive technology law in Massachusetts (pp. 531-550). Boston: Massachusetts Continuing Legal Education.
14. Crockin, S. L. (Ed.). (2000). Adoption and reproductive technology law in Massachusetts. Boston: Massachusetts Continuing Legal Education.
15. Daar, J. F. (2001). Frozen embryo disputes revisited: A trilogy of procreation-avoidance approaches. Journal of Law, Medicine, and Ethics, 29, 197-202.
16. Dalton, S. (2000). Nonbiological mothers and the legal boundaries of motherhood. In H. Ragone & F. W. Twine (Eds.), Ideologies and technologies of motherhood: Race, class, sexuality, nationalism. New York: Routledge.
17. Davis v. Davis, 842 S.W.2d 588 (Tenn. 1992).
18. Dienhart, A. (1998). Reshaping fatherhood: The social construction of shared parenting. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
19. Dolgin, J. L. (1997). Defining the family: Law, technology, and reproduction in an uneasy age. New York: New York University Press.
20. Dresser, R. (2000, November/December). Regulating assisted reproduction. Hastings Center Report, pp. 26-27.
21. Edwards, J. N. (1991). New conceptions: Biosocial innovations and the family. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 53, 349-360.
22. Ely, J. H. (1980). Democracy and distrust: A theory of judicial review. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
23. Fenwick, L. B. (1998). Private choices, public consequences: Reproductive technology and the new ethics of conception, pregnancy, and family. New York: Dutton.
24. Franklin, S. (1997). Embodied progress: A cultural account of assisted conception. New York: Routledge.
25. Franklin, S., & McKinnon, S. (2000). New directions in kinship study: A core concept revisited. Current Anthropology, 41, 275-279.
26. Franklin, S., & McKinnon, S. (Eds.). (2001). Relative value: Reconfiguring kinship studies. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
27. Franklin, S., & Ragone, H. (Eds.). (1998). Reproducing reproduction: Kinship, power, and technological innovation. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
28. Freundlich, J. (2001). Adoptionand ethics: Adoptionand assisted reproduction (Vol. 4). Washington, DC: Child Welfare League of America.
29. Garrison, M. (1999). The technological family: What's new and what's not. Family Law Quarterly, 33, 691-704.
30. Gillman, H., & Clayton, C. (1999). The Supreme Court in American politics: New institutionalist interpretations. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
31. Glendon, M. A. (1994). A nation under lawyers: How the crisis in the legal profession is transforming American society. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.
32. Gostin, L. O. (2001). Surrogacy from the perspective of economic and civil liberties. Journal of Contemporary Health Law and Policy, 17, 429-449.
33. Hill, J. L. (1991). What does it mean to be a "parent"? The claims of biology as the basis for parental rights. New York University Law Review, 66, 353-420.
34. Holbrook, S. M. (1996). Social workers' attitudes toward participants' rights in adoption and new reproductive technologies. Health and Social Work, 21, 257-266.
35. hooks, b. (1984). Feminist theory: From margin to center. Boston: South End.
36. Hunter, M., Salter-Ling, N., & Glover, L. (2000). Donor insemination: Telling children about their origins. Child Psychology and Psychiatry Review, 54 (4). 157-163.
37. In the Matter of Baby M., 109 NJ 396, 537 A.2d 1227 (1988).
38. Jacobs, F. H., & Davies, M. W. (Eds.). (1994). More than kissing babies. Current child and family policy in the United States. Westport, CT: Auburn House.
39. Jaycee B. v. Superior Court of Orange County, 42 Cal. App. 4th 718 (1996).
40. Johnson v. Calvert, 5 Cal. 4th 84 (1993).
41. Katz-Rothman, B. (2000). Recreating motherhood. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
42. Lauritzen, P. (1993). Pursuing parenthood: Ethical issues in assisted reproduction. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
43. Lindgren, R., & Taub, N. (1993). Law of sex discrimination. Wadsworth, OH: Wadsworth.
44. MacDonald, M. (2000). Some assessment for future family policy research. In J. M. Mercier, S. B. Garasky, & M. C. Shelley II (Eds.), Redefining family policy: Implications for the 21st century (pp. 261-277). Ames: Iowa State University Press.
45. Martin, E. (1987). The woman in the body: A cultural analysis of reproduction. Boston: Beacon.
46. Mason, M. A., Fine, M. A., & Carnochan, S. (2001). Family law in the new millennium: For whose families? Journal of Family Issues, 22 (7). 859-881.
47. Moen, P., & Forest, K. B. (1999). Strengthening families: Policy issues for the 21st century. In M. Sussman, S. K. Stienmetz, G. W. Peterson (Eds.), Handbook of marriage and the family (2nd ed., pp. 633-666). New York: Plenum.
48. Moschetta v. Moschetta, 25 Cal. App. 4th 1218 (1994).
49. Mullings, L. (1997). On our own terms: Race, class, and gender in the lives of African American women. New York: Routledge.
50. National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws. (2000, February). Uniform Parentage Act. Available from http://www.law.upenn.edu/bll/ ulc/upa/final00.htm
51. People v. Sorenson, 62 Cal. 2d. 280 (1968).
52. Pinkerton, T. M. (1998). Surrogacy and egg donation law in California. Available from http://www.surrogacy.com/legals/article/calaw.html
53. Posner, R. A. (1996). The federal courts: Challenge and reform. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
54. Purdy, L. M. (1996). Reproducing persons: Issues in feminist bioethics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
55. Ragone, H. (1994). Surrogate motherhood: Conception in the heart. Boulder, CO: Westview.
56. Robertson, J. A. (1992). Resolving disputes over frozen embryos. In C. S. Campbell (Ed.), What price parenthood? Ethics and assisted reproduction (pp. 36-41). Aldershot, UK: Dartmouth.
57. Rosen, D. M. (1999). American families and American law. In M. Sussman, S. K. Stienmetz, & G. W. Peterson (Eds.), Handbook of marriage and the family (2nd ed., pp. 553-570). New York: Plenum.
58. Shanley, M. L. (2001). Making babies, making families: What matters most in an age of reproductive technologies, surrogacy, adoption, and same sex and unwed parents. Boston: Beacon.
59. Shapiro, V. B., Shapiro, J. R., & Paret, I. H. (2001). Complex adoption and assisted reproductive technology. New York: Guilford.
60. Sheldon, C. H., & Maule, L. S. (1997). Choosing justice: The recruitment of state and federal judges. Pullman: Washington State University Press.
61. Strathern, M. (1992). Reproducing the future: Anthropology, kinship, and the new reproductive technologies. London: Routledge.
62. Triber, G. A. (1998). Growing pains: Disputes surrounding human reproductive interests stretch the boundaries of traditional legal concepts. Seton Hall Legislative Journal, 23, 103-140.
63. Weaver, S. E., Umana-Taylor, A. J., Hans, J. D., & Malia, S. E. C. (2001). Challenges family scholars may face in studying family diversity: A focus on Latino families, stepfamilies, and reproductive technology. Journal of Family Issues, 22, 922-939.
64. Wisensale, S. K. (2000). Family policy at the end of the 20th century. In J. M. Mercier, S. B. Garasky, & M. C. Shelley II (Eds.), Redefining family policy: Implications for the 21st century (pp. 3-20). Ames: Iowa State University Press.
65. Zimmerman, S. L. (2001). Family policy: Constructed solutions to family problems. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.