Reproduction through surrogacy: The UK and US experience

Reproductive Donation: Practice, Policy and Bioethics

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 289-307

  Braverman, Andrea ^a   Casey, Polly ^b   Jadva, Vasanti ^b  

^a RUTGERS ROBERT WOOD JOHNSON MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84925656485     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781139026390.016     Document Type: Chapter

References (36)

1. Andrews, L. B. (1989). Between Strangers: Surrogate Mothers, Expectant Fathers, and Brave New Babies. New York: Harper & Row.
2. Andrews, L. B. (1990). ‘Surrogate Motherhood: The Challenge for Feminists’, in L. Gostin (ed.), Surrogate Motherhood: Politics and Privacy. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.
3. Brazier, M., Campbell, A. and Golombok, S. (1998). Surrogacy: Review for Health Ministers of Current Arrangements for Payments and Regulation. Report of the Review Team. Cm. 4068. Department of Health, London.
4. Cameron, G. (2011). CW v. NT and another [2011] EWHC 33, Family Law Week.
5. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), statistics available from www.cdc.gov/ART/ART2006/section2c.htm#f40. Accessed. June. 30, 2009.
6. Ciccarelli, J. C. and Beckman, L. J. (2005). ‘Navigating rough waters: an overview of psychological aspects of surrogacy’. Journal of Social Issues, 61, 21 –43.
7. Crockin, S. L. and Jones Jr., H. W. (2010). Legal Conceptions: The Evolving Law and Policy of Assisted Reproductive Technologies. Baltimore: The JohnsHopkins University Press.
8. English, M. E., Mechanick-Braverman, A. and Corson, S. L. (1991). ‘Semantics and science: the distinction between gestational carrier and traditional surrogacy programs’. Women’s Health Issues, 1, 155 –7.
9. Gamble, N. (2009). ‘Crossing the line: the legal and ethical problems of foreign surrogacy’. Reproductive Biomedicine Online, 19, 151 –2.
10. Ghevaert, L. (2011). ‘International surrogacy: progress or media hype?’ BioNews, 590.
11. Golombok, S., Murray, C., Jadva, V., MacCallum, F., et al. (2004). ‘Families created through surrogacy arrangement: parent-child relationships in the 1st year of life’. Developmental Psychology, 40, 400 –11.
12. Golombok, S., MacCallum, F., Murray, C., Lycett, E., et al. (2006a). ‘Surrogacy families: parental functioning, parent-child relationships and children’s psychological development at age 2’. Journal of Child Psychologyand Psychiatry, 47, 213 –22.
13. Golombok, S., Murray, C., Jadva, V., Lycett, E., et al. (2006b). ‘Non-genetic and non-gestational parenting: consequences for parent-child relationships and the psychological well-being of mothers, fathers and children at age 3’. Human Reproduction, 21, 1918 –24.
14. Gostin, L. (1990). Surrogate Motherhood: Politics and Privacy. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.
15. Hyder, N. (2010). ‘Couple request surrogate mum to abort over disability’. Bionews, 579.
16. Jadva, J., Murray, C., Lycett, E., MacCallum, F., et al. (2003). ‘Surrogacy: the experiences of surrogate mother’. Human Reproduction, 18, 2196 –204.
17. Jadva, V., Casey, P., Readings, J., Blake L. and Golombok, S. (2011). ‘A longitudinal study of recipients’ views and experiences of intra-family egg donation’. Human Reproduction. doi: 10.1093/humrep/der252.
18. Jadva, V., Blake, L., Casey, P. and Golombok, S. (2012). ‘Surrogacy families ten years on: relationship with the surrogate, decisions over disclosure and children’s understanding of their surrogacy origins’. Human Reproduction.
19. Karpel, M. (1980). ‘Family secrets’. Family Process, 19, 295 –306.
20. Lycett, E., Daniels, K., Curson, R. and Golombok, S. (2005). ‘School-aged children of donor insemination: a study of parents’ disclosure patterns’. Human Reproduction, 20, 810 –19.
21. MacCallum, F., Lycett, E., Murray, C., Jadva, V., et al. (2003). ‘Surrogacy: the experience of commissioning couples’. Human Reproduction, 18, 1334 –42.
22. McGee, G., Vaughan-Brakman, S. and Gurmankin, A. D. (2001). ‘Disclosure to children conceived with donor gametes should not be optional’. HumanReproduction, 16, 2033 –8.
23. Pande, A. (2009). ‘“It may be her eggs but it’s my blood”: surrogates and everyday forms of kinship in India’. Qualitative Sociology, 32, 379 –97.
24. Ragoné, H. (1994). Surrogate Motherhood: Conception in the Heart. Oxford: Westview Press.
25. Raoul-Duval, A., Letur-Konirsch, H. and Frydman, R. (1992). ‘Anonymous oocyte donation: a psychological study of recipients, donors and children’. Human Reproduction, 7, 51 –4.
26. Readings, J., Blake, L., Casey, P., Jadva, V., et al. (2011). ‘Secrecy, disclosure, and everything in between: decisions of parents of children conceived by donor insemination, egg donation, and surrogacy’. Reproductive Biomedicine Online, 22, 485 –95.
27. Spar, D. L. (2006). The Baby Business: How Money, Science and Politics Drive the Commerce of Conception. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
28. Steinbock, B. (1990). ‘Surrogate Motherhood as Prenatal Adoption’, in L. Gostin (ed.), Surrogate Motherhood: Politics and Privacy. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.
29. Teman, E. (2010). Birthing a Mother. Berkley: University of California Press.
30. Tieu, M. M. (2009). ‘Altruistic surrogacy: the necessary objectii cation of surrogate mothers’. Journal of Medical Ethics, 35, 171 –5.
31. Triseliotis, J. (1973). In Search of Origins: The Experiences of Adopted People. London and Boston: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
32. Turner, A. J. and Coyle, A. (2000). ‘What does it mean to be a donor offspring? The identity experiences of adults conceived by donor insemination and the implications for counselling and therapy’. Human Reproduction, 15, 2041 –51.
33. Van den Akker, O. (2000). ‘The importance of a genetic link in mothers commissioning a surrogate baby in the UK’. Human Reproduction, 15, 1849 –55.
34. Van Zyl, L. and van Niekerk, A. (2000). ‘Interpretations, perspectives and intentions in surrogate motherhood’. Journal of Medical Ethics, 26, 404 –9.
35. Wallbank, J. (2002). ‘Too many mothers? Surrogacy, kinship and the welfare of the child’. Medical Law Review, 10, 271 –94.
36. Warnock, M. (1984). Report of the Committee of Inquiry into Human Fertilisation and Embryology. London: Department of Health and Social Security.