Assisted Reproduction, Genetic Technologies, and Family Life

The Blackwell Companion to the Sociology of Families

Volumn , Issue , 2007, Pages 478-498

  Richards, Martin ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Assisted reproduction; Cultural assumptions; Family life; Genetic disease; Genetic technologies

Indexed keywords

EID: 84889322390     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1002/9780470999004.ch27     Document Type: Chapter

References (83)

1. Achilles, R. (1992) Donor Insemination: An Overview. Ottawa: Royal Commission on New Reproductive on New Reproductive Technologies.
2. Árnason, V. and Árnason, G. (2001) Community consent, democracy and public dialogue: The case of the Icelandic health sector data base. Politeia, 17, 105-16.
3. Atkinson, P., Parsons, E., and Featherstone, K. (2001) Professional constructions of family and kinship in medical genetics. New Genetics and Society, 20, 5-24.
4. Bainham, A. (2002) Can we protect children and protect their rights? Family Law, 279-89.
5. Baran, A. and Pannar, R. (1989) Lethal Secrets: The Psychology of Donor Insemination. New York: Amistad.
6. Barnes, J. A. (1973) Genetrix: genitor : : nature : culture. In J. Goody (ed.), Culture of Kinship. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7. Bartholomew, G.W. (1958) Development and use of artificial insemination. Eugenics Review, 49, 187-95.
8. Bharadwaj, A. (2003) Why adoption is not an option in India: The visibility of infertility, the secrecy of donor insemination and other cultural complexities. Social Science and Medicine, 56, 1867-80.
9. Binney, C. (1949) Legal and social implications of artificial insemination. Eugenics Review, 40, 199-204.
10. Blacker, C. P. (1958) Artificial insemination: The society's position. Eugenics Review, 50, 51-4.
11. Blyth, E. (1999) Secrets and lies. Barriers to the exchange of genetic origins information following donor-assisted conception. Adoption and Fostering, 23, 49-58.
12. Blyth, E., and Hunt, J. (1998) Sharing genetic origin information in donor assisted conception: Views from licensed centres on HFEA donor information form. Human Reproduction, 13, 3274-7.
13. Brewer, H. (1935) Eutelegenesis. Eugenics Review, 27, 121-6.
14. Carter, C. O. (1983) Eugenic implications of new techniques. In C. O. Carter (ed.), Developments in Human Reproduction and their Eugenic, Ethical Implications. London: Academic.
15. Cook, R. (2002) Villain, hero or masked stranger: ambivalence in transactions with human genetics. In A. Bainham, S. Day-Sclater, and M. Richards (eds.), Body Lore and Laws. Oxford: Hart.
16. Cook, R., and Golombok, S. (1995) A survey of semen donation: Phase 2-the view of donors. Human Reproduction, 10, 951-9.
17. Cox, S. M., and Burgess, M. M. (2000) Victims, Heroes or Pioneers; Moral Experiences of Hereditary Risk and Illness. Paper presented at the Canadian Bioethics Society Conference, Quebec.
18. Cox, S.M., and McKellin, W. H. (1999a) "There's this thing in our family": Predictive testing and the social construction of risk for Huntington's disease. In P. Conrad and J. Gabe (eds.), Sociological Perspectives on the New Genetics. Oxford: Blackwell.
19. Cox, S. M., and McKellin, W. H. (1999b) "There's this thing in our family": Predictive testing and the construction of risk for Huntington's disease. Sociology of Health and Illness, 21, 622-46.
20. Department of Health (2001a) Code of Practice and Guidance on Genetic Paternity Testing Services. London: Department of Health.
21. Department of Health (2001b) Donor Information Consultation. Providing Information About Sperm, Egg and Embryo Donors. London: Department of Health. Available online at www.doh.gov.uk/gametedonors
22. Donor Conception Support Group of Australia (1997) Let the Offspring Speak: Discussions on Donor Conception. Genges Hill, NSW: Donor Conception Support Group of Australia.
23. Edwards, J. D., Franklin, S., Hirsch, E., Price, F., and Strathern, M. (1999) Technologies of Procreation. Kinship in the Age of Assisted Conception. 2nd ed. London: Routledge.
24. Finkler, K. (2001) The kin in the gene: The medicalization of family and kinship in American society. Current Anthropology, 42, 235-63.
25. Franklin, S. (2001) Biologization revisited: Kinship theory in the context of the new biologies. In S. Franklin and S. McKinnon (eds.), Relative Values: Reconfiguring Kinship Studies. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
26. Franklin, S., and McKinnon, S. (eds.) (2001) Relative Values: Reconfiguring Kinship Studies. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
27. Freeman, M. (1996) The new birth right? International Journal of Children's Rights, 4, 273-97.
28. Galton, F. (1907) Probability, the Foundation of Eugenics. The Herbert Spencer Lecture. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
29. Gaskell, G. and Bauer, M. W. (eds.) (2001) Biotechnology 1996-2000. London: Science Museum.
30. Giddens, A. (1991) Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age. Cambridge: Polity.
31. Golombok, S., Brewaeys, A., Cook, R., Giavazzi, M. T., Guerra, G., Mantovanni, A., Van Hall, E., Crosignani, P. G., and Dexeus, S. (1996) The European study of assisted reproduction families. Human Reproduction, 11, 2324-31.
32. Golombok, S., Brewaeys, A., Giavazzi, M.T., Guerra, G., Mantovanni, A., Van Hall, E., Crosignani, P. G., and Dexeus, S. 1996. (2002a) The European study of assisted reproduction families: The transition to adolescence. Human Reproduction, 17, 830-40.
33. Golombok, S., MacCallum, F. M., Goodman, E., and Rutter, M. (2002b) Parenting and contemporary reproductive technologies. In M. H. Barnstein (ed.), Handbook of Parenting, 2nd ed. Vol. 3. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
34. Grokevart, M. D., and McRoy, R. G. (1998) Openness in Adoption. Exploring Family Connections. New York: Sage.
35. Haimes, E. (1993) Issues of gender in gamete donation. Social Science and Medicine, 36, 85-93.
36. Haimes, E. (1998) The making of "the DI child": Changing representations of people conceived through donor insemination. In K. Daniels and E. Haimes (eds.), Donor Insemination: International Social Science Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
37. Hanmer, J. (1987) Transforming consciousness. Women and the new reproductive technologies. In G. Cerea et al. (eds.), Man-Made Women. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
38. Harper, P. S., Lim, S., and Craufurt, D. (2000) Ten years of pre symptomatic testing for Huntington's disease: The experience of the UK Huntington's disease consortium. Journal of Medical Genetics, 37, 567-71.
39. Harris, J. (1998) Clones, Genes and Immortality: Ethics and the Genetic Revolution. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
40. His Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury's Communication (1948) Artificial Human Insemination. London: Society for the Propagation of Human Knowledge.
41. Howe, D. and Feast, J. (2000) Adoption, Search and Reunion. London: Children's Society.
42. Jackson, E. (2001) Regulating Reproduction. Law, Technology and Autonomy. Oxford: Hart.
43. Jackson, M. H. (1945) A medical service for the treatment of involuntary sterility. Eugenic Review, 36, 117-25.
44. Johnson, M. (1999) A biomedical perspective on parenthood. In A. Bainham, S. Day-Sclater and M. Richards (eds.), What is a Parent? A Socio Legal Analysis. Oxford: Hart.
45. Kenen, R., and Schmidt, R. (1978) Stigmatization of carrier status: Social implications of heterozygote genetic screening programmes. American Journal of Public Health, 68, 1116-19.
46. Kevles, D. J. (1985) In the Name of Eugenics. New York: Knopf.
47. Marteau, T., and Richards, M. P. M. (eds.) (1996) The Troubled Helix. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
48. McMillan, J. (2002) Sex selection in the United Kingdom. Hastings Center Report, 32, 28-31.
49. Morgan, D. (1991) Blackstone's Guide to the Human Fertilization and Embryology Act 1990. London: Blackstone.
50. Muller, H. (1963) Discussion at international conference held by the Ciba Foundation. In G. Wolstenholme (ed.), Man and His Future. London: Churchill.
51. Nelkin, D., and Lindee, S. (1995) The DNA Mystique. New York: Freeman.
52. Novas, C., and Rose, N. (2000) Genetic risk and the birth of the somatic individual. Economy and Society, 29, 485-513.
53. Nukago, Y. (2002) Between tradition and innovation in new genetics: The continuity of medical pedigrees and the development of combination work in the case of Huntington's disease. New Genetics and Society, 21, 39-64.
54. Oakley, A. (1984) The Captured Womb: A History of the Medical Care of Pregnant Women. Oxford: Blackwell.
55. O'Neill, O. (2002) Autonomy and Trust in Bioethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
56. Parsons, E., and Bradley, D. (1994) Ethical issues in newborn screening for Duchenne muscular dystrophy. In A. Clarke (ed.), Genetic Counselling, Practice and Principles. London: Routledge.
57. Paul, D. B. (1998) Controlling Human Heredity: 1865 to the Present. Amherst, NY: Humanity Books.
58. Petersen, A., and Bunton, R. (2002) The New Genetics and the Public's Health. London: Routledge.
59. Petersen, A., and Lupton, D. (1996) The New Public Health: Health and Self in the Age of Risk. London: Sage.
60. Rapp, R. (2000) Testing Women, Testing the Fetus: The Social Impact of Amniocentesis in America. New York: Routledge.
61. Raymond, J. G. (1994) Women or Wombs: Reproductive Technologies and the Battle Over Women's Freedom. Melbourne: Spinifex.
62. Reuters (2002) June 11. Available online at www.reuters.com
63. Richards, M. (2002) Future bodies: Some history and future prospects for human genetic selection. In A. Bainham, S. Day-Sclater, and M. Richards (eds.), Body Lore and Laws. Oxford: Hart.
64. Richards, M. P. M. (1996) Families, kinship and genetics. In T. Marteau and M. P. M. Richards (eds.), The Troubled Helix: Social and Psychological Implications of the New Human Genetics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
65. Richards, M. P. M. (1998) Annotation: Genetic research, family life and clinical practice. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 39, 291-305.
66. Richards, M. P. M. (2000) Unpublished Data. Centre for Family Research, University of Cambridge.
67. Richards, M. P. M. (2001) How distinctive is genetic information? Studies in the History of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 32, 663-87.
68. Schneider, D. (1980) Kinship: A Cultural Account. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
69. Silver, L. M. (1998) Remaking Eden. Cloning, Genetic Engineering and the Future of Human Kind. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson.
70. Spallone, P. (1987) Reproductive technology and the state: The Warnock Report and its clones. In P. Spallone and D. L. Steinberg (eds.), Made to Order: the Myth of Reproductive and Genetic Progress. Oxford: Pergamon.
71. Stanworth, M. (ed.) (1987) Reproductive Technologies: Gender, Motherhood and Medicine. Cambridge: Polity Press.
72. Steinbock, B. (2002) Sex selection. Not obviously wrong. Hastings Center Report, 32, 23-8.
73. Steptoe, P., and Edwards, R. G. (1978) Birth after the replacement of a human embryo. Lancet, ii, 366.
74. Stratford, N., Marteau, T., and Bobrow, M. (1999) Tailoring genes. In R. Jowell et al. (eds.), British Social Attitudes. The 16th Report. Aldershot: Ashgate.
75. Strathern, M. (1992) Reproducing the Future. Essays on Anthropology, Kinship and the New Reproductive Technologies. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
76. Strathern, M. (1999) Property, Substance and Effect. Anthropological Essays on Persons and Things. London: Athlone.
77. Taitz, J., Weekers, J. E. M., and Mosca, D. T. (2002) DNA and immigration: The ethical ramifications. Lancet, 359, 794.
78. Thompson, C. (2001) Strategic Naturalizing: Kinship in the Infertility Clinic. Relative Values. Reconfiguring Kinship Studies. Duke, NC: Duke University Press.
79. Turner, J. and Coyle, A. (2000) What does it mean to be a donor offspring? Human Reproduction, 11, 2041-51.
80. Wagner, W., Kronberger, N., Gaskell, G. et al. (2002) Nature in disorder. The troubled public of biotechnology. In G. Gaskell and M.W. Bauer (eds.), Biotechnology 1996-2000. The Years of Controversy. London: Science Museum.
81. Weston, K. (1996) Families We Choose: Lesbians, Gays, Kinship. New York: Columbia University Press.
82. Wexler, N.S. (1979) Genetic "Russian roulette"; The experience of being "at risk" for Huntington's disease. In S. Kessler (ed.), Genetic Counselling: Psychological Dimensions. New York: Academic.
83. Yanagisako, S. and Delaney, C. (1995) Naturalizing power. In C. Delaney and S. Yanagisako (eds.), Naturalizing Power. New York: Routledge.