Abstract
The issue of reproductive rights is of both individual and social concern but it is also an issue about which there has been, historically and to date, considerable discussion and debate. With reference to current issues and concerns the medical profession, ethicists and religious communities have much to say, particularly following the development of many technological innovations which have far-reaching implications for individual biological and genetic identities, and for humankind. These innovations arouse strong emotions and passions, ranging from outright horror through to unquestioning acceptance. It is worth noting, however, that these debates rarely focus on the rights and experiences of women (and men). For example, the Warnock Committee’s Report on human fertilization and embryology (Warnock 1984) focused on the rights of the child and on the implications for the family (Stacey 1988; Spallone 1989). Contemporary debate and discussion of the new reproductive technologies (NRTs) in the UK and elsewhere continues within the same political rhetoric (Hartouni 1997; Ettore 2002).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
D. Acheson, Independent Inquiry into Inequalities in Health: A Report (London: HMSO, 1998).
E. Annandale and J. Clark, ‘What is gender? Feminist theory and the sociology of human reproduction’, Sociology of Health and Illness, 18:1 (1996) 17–44.
C. Battersby, The Phenomenal Woman: Feminist Metaphysics and the Patterns of Identity (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1998).
A. Bennett, ‘Leading Article’, The Guardian, 28:2 (1996) 8.
M. Berer, ‘Abortion: unfinished business’, Reproductive Health Matters, 9 (1997) 6–9.
Birmingham Evening Post, Frantic bid to stop abortion: court ruling over former girlfriend, 21 March 2001, 4.
J. Butler, Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity (London: Routledge, 1990).
A. Campbell, Childfree and Sterilised: Women’s Decisions and Medical Responses (London: Cassell, 1999).
R. Collier, ‘Men, heterosexuality and the changing family: (re)constructing fatherhood in law and social policy’, in G. Jagger and C. Wright (eds), Changing Family Values (London: Routledge, 1999).
T. de Lauretis, Alice Doesn’t: Feminism, Semiotics, Cinema (London: Macmillan, 1984).
E. M. DiLapi, ‘Lesbian mothers and the motherhood hierarchy’, Journal of Homosexuality, 18:1–2 (1989) 101–121.
S. Earle, ‘Why some women do not breast feed: bottle feeding and fathers’ role’, Midwifery, 16 (2000) 323–330.
S. Earle, ‘Factors affecting breastfeeding uptake: implications for breast promotion’, Health Promotion International, 17:3 (2002) 205–214.
Z. R. Eisenstein, The Female Body and the Law (London: University of California Press, 1988).
E. Ettore, Reproductive Genetics, Gender and the Body (London: Routledge, 2002).
M. Hammersley and R. Gomm, ‘Bias in social research’, Sociological Research Online, 2:1 (1997). www.socresonline.org.uk/socresonline/2/4/7.html.
S. Harding, ‘Introduction: is there a feminist method?’ in S. Harding (ed.), Feminism and Methodology (Buckingham: Open University Press, 1987).
V. Hartouni, Cultural Conceptions on Reproductive Technologies and the Remaking of Life (London: University of Minnesota Press, 1997).
S. Himmelweit, ‘More than “a woman’s right to choose”’, Feminist Review, 29 (Spring) (1988) 38–53.
M. C. Inhorn, ‘Money, marriage and morality: constraints on IVF treatment seeking among infertile Egyptian couples’, in C. M. Obermeyer (ed.), Cultural Perspectives on Reproductive Health (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001).
M. C. Inhorn and F. van Balen (eds), Infertility Around the Globe: New Thinking on Childlessness, Gender and Reproductive Technologies (Berkeley and Los Angeles: California University Press, 2002).
K. B. Jones, Compassionate Authority: Democracy and the Representation of Women (London: Routledge, 1993).
M. S. Kimmel, The Gendered Society (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000).
S. Kitzinger, ‘Birth and violence against women: generating hypotheses from women’s accounts of unhappiness after childbirth’, in H. Roberts (ed.), Women’s Health Matters (London: Routledge, 1992).
G. Letherby, ‘Other than mother and mothers as others: the experience of motherhood and non-motherhood in relation to “infertility” and “involuntary childlessness”’, Women’s Studies International Forum, 22:3 (1999) 359–372.
G. Letherby, Feminist Research in Theory and Practice (Buckingham: Open University Press, 2003).
M. Lock and P. A. Kaufert, Pragmatic Women and Body Politics (Cambridge; Cambridge University Press, 1998).
J. Lorber, Paradoxes of Gender New Haven (CT: Yale University Press, 1994).
F. McAllister and G. Letherby (under review). ‘Invisible men? Fertility, fatherhood and non-fatherhood’, The Sociological Review.
R. Petchesky, Abortion and Woman’s Choice: The State, Sexuality and Reproductive Freedom (London: Verso, 1986).
N. Press, C. H. Browner, D. Tram, C. Morton and B. Le Master, ‘Provisional Normalcy and “perfect babies”: pregnant women’s attitudes toward disability in the context of prenatal testing’, in S. Franklin and H. Ragoné (eds), Reproducing Reproduction: Kinship, Power, and Technological Innovation (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1998).
H. Ragoné and F. W. Twine (eds), Ideologies and Technologies of Motherhood: Race, Class, Sexuality, Nationalism (London: Routledge, 2000).
R. Rapp, ‘Foreword’, in H. Ragoné and F. W. Twine (eds), Ideologies and Technologies of Motherhood: Race, Class, Sexuality, Nationalism (London: Routledge, 2000) pp. xiii–xvi.
P. Spallone, Beyond Conception: The New Politics of Reproduction (London: Macmillan, 1989).
M. Stacey, The Sociology of Health and Healing (London: Unwin Hyman, 1988).
M. Stacey, ‘Social dimensions of assisted reproduction’, in M. Stacey (ed.), Changing Human Reproduction: Social Science Perspectives (London: Sage, 1992).
L. Stanley, ‘My mother’s voice? On becoming a “native” in academia’, in L. Morley and V. Walsh (eds), Out of the Margins: Women’s Studies in the Nineties (London: Falmer, 1995).
L. Stanley, ‘Children of our time: politics, ethics and feminist research processes’, paper presented at ‘Feminism and Educational Research Methodologies’ Conference, Institute of Education, Manchester Metropolitan University (June 1999).
C. Stimpson, Where the Meanings Are (New York: Methuen, 1988).
F. van Balen and M. C. Inhorn, ‘Introduction: interpreting infertility: a view from the social sciences’, in M. C. Inhorn and F. van Balen (eds), Infertility Around the Globe: New Thinking on Childlessness, Gender and Reproductive Technologies (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2002).
M. Warnock, The Warnock Report: Report of the Committee of Inquiry into Human Fertilisation and Embryology (London: Routledge, 1984).
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2003 Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Earle, S., Letherby, G. (2003). Introducing Gender, Identity and Reproduction. In: Earle, S., Letherby, G. (eds) Gender, Identity & Reproduction. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230522930_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230522930_1
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-50829-7
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-52293-0
eBook Packages: Palgrave Social & Cultural Studies CollectionSocial Sciences (R0)