Fresh or frozen? Classifying 'spare' embryos for donation to human embryonic stem cell research

Social Science and Medicine

Volumn 71, Issue 12, 2010, Pages 2204-2211

  Ehrich, Kathryn ^a   Williams, Clare ^a   Farsides, Bobbie ^b  

^a KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b BRIGHTON AND SUSSEX MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Built moral environment; Classification; Embryo; Ethics; Ethnography; Moral work object; Spare embryo; Stem cell research; UK

Indexed keywords

EMBRYO; ETHICS; FERTILIZATION (REPRODUCTION); LABORATORY METHOD;

ARTICLE; CRYOPRESERVATION; EMBRYONIC STEM CELL; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; HUMAN; INTERVIEW; MEDICAL ETHICS; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MEDICAL STAFF; OOCYTE DONATION; PATIENT CODING; PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; SOCIAL ASPECT; STANDARDIZATION;

ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; CRYOPRESERVATION; EMBRYO DISPOSITION; EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS; FEMALE; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; GREAT BRITAIN; HUMANS; PROFESSIONAL-PATIENT RELATIONS; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; STEM CELL RESEARCH; TISSUE AND ORGAN PROCUREMENT;

UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 78649451039     PISSN: 02779536     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.09.045     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Alderson P., Farsides B., Williams C. Examining ethics in practice: health service professionals' evaluations of in-hospital ethics seminars. Nursing Ethics 2002, 9:518-531.
2. Barratt C.L.R., St.John J.C., Afnan M. Clinical challenges in providing embryos for stem-cell initiatives. The Lancet 2004, 364:115-118.
3. Bauer S., Wahlberg A. Contested categories: Life sciences in society 2009, Ashgate, Abingdon, Oxon.
4. Bowker G.C., Star S.L. Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences 1999, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
5. Braude P. One child at a time: Reducing multiple births after IVF. Report of the Expert group on multiple births after IVF 2006, HFEA, accessed at. http://www.hfea.gov.uk/docs/MBSET_report_Final_Dec_06.pdf.
6. Brison D., Lieberman B. An ethical way to provide more embryos for research 2003, BioNews 26 November, Progress Educational Trust, accessed at. http://www.BioNews.org.uk.
7. Casper M.J. Negotiations, work objects, and the unborn patient: the interactional scaffolding of fetal surgery. Symbolic Interaction 1998, 21:379-400.
8. Cohen C.B. Ethical and policy issues surrounding the donation of cryopreserved and fresh embryos for human embryonic stem cell research. Stem Cell Reviews & Reports 2009, 5:116-122.
9. Cussins C. Ontological choreography: agency for women patients in infertility clinics. Social Studies of Science 1996, 8:575-610.
10. Cutting R., Morroll D., Roberts S.A., Pickering S., Rutherford A. Elective single embryo transfer: guidelines for practice British Fertility Society and Association of clinical embryologists. Human Fertility 2008, 11:131-146. on behalf of the BFS and ACE.
11. de Lacey S. Patients' attitudes to their embryos and their destiny: social conditioning?. Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology 2006, 21:101-112.
12. de Lacey S. Decisions for the fate of frozen embryos: fresh insights into patients' thinking and their rationales for donating or discarding embryos. Human Reproduction 2007, 22:1751-1758.
13. Ehrich K., Williams C., Farsides B., Sandall J., Scott R. Choosing embryos: ethical complexity and relational autonomy in staff accounts of PGD. Sociology of Health & Illness 2007, 29:1-16.
14. Ehrich K., Williams C., Scott R., Sandall J., Farsides B. Social welfare, genetic welfare? Boundary work in the IVF/PGD clinic. Social Science & Medicine 2006, 63:1213-1224.
15. Ehrich K., Williams C., Farsides B. The embryo as moral work object: PGD/IVF staff views and experiences. Sociology of Health & Illness 2008, 30:772-787.
16. Ehrich K., Williams C., Farsides B. Consenting futures: professional views on social, clinical and ethical aspects of information feedback to embryo donors in human embryonic stem cell research. Clinical Ethics 2010, 5(1):77-85.
17. Franklin S. Embryonic economies: the double reproductive value of stem cells. BioSocieties 2006, 1:71-90.
18. Franklin S., Roberts C. Born and Made: An ethnography of preimplantation genetic diagnosis 2006, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
19. Haimes E., Taylor K. Fresh embryo donation for human embryonic stem cell (hESC) research: the experiences and values of IVF couples asked to be embryo donors. Human Reproduction 2009, 24:2142-2150.
20. Hedgecoe A. Expansion and uncertainty: cystic fibrosis, classification and genetics. Sociology of Health & Illness 2003, 25:50-70.
21. Heng B.C. Donation of surplus frozen embryos for stem cell research or fertility treatment - should medical professionals and healthcare institutions be allowed to exercise undue influence on the informed decision of their former patients?. Journal of Assisted Reproduction & Genetics 2006, 23:381-382.
22. Kerr A. Assisted conception and the audit culture. Human Fertility 2008, 11:9-16.
23. Konrad M. Nameless relations: Anonymity, Melanesia, and reproductive gift exchange between British ova donors and recipients 2004, Berghahn Books, London.
24. Latimer J., Featherstone K., Atkinson P., Clarke A., Pilz D.T., Shaw A. Rebirthing the clinic: the interaction of clinical judgment and genetic technology in the production of medical science. Science, Technology & Human Values 2006, 31:599-630.
25. Lave J., Wenger E. Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation 1991, University Press, Cambridge.
26. Lofland J., Lofland L. Analysing social Settings: A guide to qualitative observation and analysis 1984, Wadsworth, Belmont.
27. McLeod C., Baylis Donating fresh versus frozen embryos to stem cell research: in whose interests?. Bioethics 2007, 21:465-477.
28. Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self, and society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
29. Stem cell infrastructure report, June 2008, Medical Research Council.
30. Morgan L.M. Embryo tales. Rethinking life and death: Toward an anthropology of the biosciences 2003, 261-292. School of American Research, Santa Fe, NM. S. Franklin, M. Lock (Eds.).
31. Mulkay, M. (1997). The embryo research debate: Science and the politics of reproduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
32. Papanikolaou E.G., Kolibianakis E.M., Tourneye H., Venetis C.A., Fatemi H., Tarlatzis B., et al. Live birth rates after transfer of equal number of blastocysts or cleavage stage embryos in IVF: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Human Reproduction 2008, 23:91-99.
33. Parry S. (Re)constructing embryos in stem cell research: exploring the meaning of embryos for people involved in fertility treatments. Social Science & Medicine 2006, 62:2349-2359.
34. Postnote: Stem cell research, March, no 174 2002, POST (Parliamentary Office of Science & Technology), Accessed at. http://www.parliament.uk/documents/post/pn174.pdf.
35. Ritchie J., Spencer L. Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. Analysing qualitative data 1994, 173-194. Routledge, London. A. Bryman, R.G. Burgess (Eds.).
36. Roberts C., Throsby K. Paid to share: IVF patients, eggs and stem cell research. Social Science & Medicine 2008, 66:159-169.
37. Spallone P. Beyond conception: The new politics of reproduction 1989, MacMillan Education, London.
38. Star S.L. The ethnography of infrastructure. American Behavioural Scientist 1999, 43:377-391.
39. Strauss A. A social world perspective. Studies in Symbolic Interaction 1978, 1:119-128.
40. Svendsen M.N., Koch L. Unpacking the spare embryo: facilitating stem cell research in a moral landscape. Social Studies of Science 2008, 38:93-110.
41. Thompson C. Making parents: The ontological choreography of reproductive technologies 2005, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
42. Wainwright S., Williams C., Michael M., Farsides B., Cribb A. Ethical boundary-work in the embryonic stem cell laboratory. Sociology of Health and Illness 2006, 28:732-748.
43. Waldby C. Stem cells, tissue cultures, and the production of biovalue. Health 2002, 6:305-323.
44. Williams C., Kitzinger J., Henderson L. Envisaging the embryo in stem cell research: rhetorical strategies and media reporting of the ethical debates. Sociology of Health and Illness 2003, 25(7):793-814.
45. Williams C., Wainwright S., Ehrich K., Michael M. Human embryos as boundary objects? Some reflections on the biomedical worlds of embryonic stem cells and preimplantation genetic diagnosis. New Genetics and Society 2008, 27(March):7-18.
46. Winner L. Do artefacts have politics?. Daedalus 1980, 109:121-136.