Ethical problems with infertility treatments: Attitudes and explanations

Social Science Journal

Volumn 47, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 731-746

  Shreffler, Karina M ^a   Johnson, David R ^b   Scheuble, Laurie K ^b  

^a OKLAHOMA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

ART; Assisted reproductive technologies; Ethics; Infertility

Indexed keywords

EID: 77957166145     PISSN: 03623319     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.soscij.2010.07.012     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Abbey A., Andrews F.M., Halman L.J. Gender's role in responses to infertility. Psychology of Women Quarterly 1991, 15:295-316.
2. Allison P.D. Missing data 2001, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
3. Bondolfi A. IVF, its success rates and their ethical significance. In vitro fertilisation in the 1990s: Towards a medical, social and ethical evaluation.. 1998, Ashgate, Aldershot, Hampshire. E. Hildt, D. Mieth (Eds.).
4. Brkovich A.M., Fisher W.A. Psychological distress and infertility: Forty years of research. Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1998, 19:218-228.
5. CDCP. (2000). Contribution of assisted reproductive technology and ovulation-inducing drugs to triple and higher order multiple births: United States, 1980-1997. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.
6. Ciabattari T. Changes in men's conservative gender role ideologies: Cohort and period influences. Gender and Society 2001, 15(1):574-591.
7. Ciccarelli J.C., Beckman L.J. Navigation rough waters: An overview of psychological aspects of surrogacy. Journal of Social Issues 2005, 61(1):21-43.
8. Donaldson, A. I. E. B. (1997). Benchmark adoption survey: Report on the findings.
9. Fisher A.P. Still " not quite as good as having your own" ? Toward a sociology of adoption. Annual Review of Sociology 2003, 29:335-361.
10. Frank O., Bianchi P.G., Campana A. The end of fertility: Age, fecundity, and fecundability in women. Journal of Biosocial Science 1994, 26(3):349-368.
11. Gerson K Hard choices 1985, University of California Press, Berkley, CA.
12. Grasmick H., Wilcox L.P., Bird S. The effects of religious fundamentalism and religiosity on preference for traditional family values. Sociological Inquiry 1990, 60:352-369.
13. Greil A.L. Infertility and psychological distress: A critical review of the literature. Social Science and Medicine 1997, 45:1679-1704.
14. Halman L.J., Abbey A., Andrews F. Attitudes about infertility interventions among fertile and infertile couples. American Journal of Public Health 1992, 82:191-194.
15. Hout M. Abortion politics in the United States, 1972-1994: From single issue to ideology. Gender Issues 1999, 17(2):3-34.
16. Jensen L., Jensen J. Family values, religiosity and gender. Psychological Reports 1993, 73:429-430.
17. Johnson D.R., White L.K. National survey of fertility barriers 2009, The Pennsylvania State University Population Research Institute, University Park, PA.
18. Kingston P., Hubbard R., Lapp B., Schroeder P., Wilson J. Why education matters. Sociology of Education 2003, 76:53-70.
19. Kulik L. The impact of social background on gender-role ideology. Journal of Family Issues 2002, 23(1):53-73.
20. Luker K. Abortion and the politics of motherhood 1984, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.
21. Macklin R. Artificial means of reproduction and our understanding of the family. The Hastings Center Report 1991, 21(1):5-11.
22. Marshall K.P., Georgievskava Z., Georgievsky I. Social reactions to Valium and Prozac: A cultural lag perspective of drug diffusion and adoption. Journal of Midwifery and Women's Health 2009, 5(2):94-107.
23. Menken J., Trussell J., Larsen U. Age and infertility. Science 1986, 233:1389-1394.
24. Mitchell A.A. Editorials: Infertility treatment - More risks and challenges. The New England Journal of Medicine 2002, 346(10):769-770.
25. Morgan M. The impact of religion on gender-role attitudes. Psychology of Women Quarterly 1987, 11:301-310.
26. Morgan S.P., King R.B. Why have children in the 21st century? Biological predisposition, social coercion, rational choice. European Journal of Population 2001, 17:3-20.
27. Ogburn W.F. Social change 1922, B.W. Huebsch Inc, New York.
28. Parens E., Knowles L.P. Special supplement: Reprogentics and public policy: Reflections and recommendations. The Hastings Center Report 2003, 33(4):S1-S24.
29. Peterman J. Telling their stories: Puerto Rican women and abortion 1996, Westview Press Inc, Boulder, CO.
30. Petrozza, J. (2004). Assisted reproductive technology. Medicine: Instant access to the minds of medicine. Retrieved from http://www.emedicine.com/med/topic3288.htm.
31. Rebar R.W., DeCherney A.H. Assisted reproductive technology in the United States. The New England Journal of Medicine 2004, 350(16):1603-1604.
32. Ridgeway C.L., Correll S.J. Motherhood as a status characteristic. Journal of Social Issues 2004, 60:683-700.
33. Rifkin J. The biotech century: Human life as intellectual property. The Nation 1998, 266:11-19.
34. Singer E., Corning A., Antonucci T. Attitudes toward genetic testing and fetal diagnosis, 1990-1996. Journal of Health and Social Behavior 1999, 40(4):429-445.
35. Singer E., Corning A., Lamias M. The polls-trends: Genetic testing, engineering, and therapy: Awareness and attitudes. Public Opinion Quarterly 1998, 62:633-664.
36. Stacey J. In the name of the family 1996, Beacon Press, Boston, MA.
37. StataCorp. (2005). Stata statistical software: Release 9.0. College Station, TX: StataCorp.
38. Ulrich M., Weatherall A. Motherhood and infertility: Viewing motherhood through the lens of infertility. Feminism and Psychology 2000, 10:323-336.
39. U.S. Catholic Bishops. (2009). Natural family planning program. Washington, DC: United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.
40. Wright, V. V., Schieve, L. A., Reynolds, M. R., & Jeng, G. (2003). Assisted reproductive technology surveillance - United States, 2000.
41. Waldfogel J. The effects of children on women's wages. American Sociological Review 1997, 62:209-217.