Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Technologies of Enchantment: Commercial Surrogacy and Egg Donation in India

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Selective Reproduction in the 21st Century

  • 584 Accesses

Abstract

The chapter describes intending parents (IPs) narrative accounts of their experiences of egg donation and surrogacy in India. IPs describe non-technological selection in their narratives of family formation, referred to in this chapter as selective moments. IPs emotional investments in these moments are highlighted in the narratives of selecting gamete donors and surrogate mothers. Drawing on data from two different groups of participants, the chapter examines how selective moments differ for gay men and heterosexual couples. The thread that connects all the instances discussed is the emotion embedded in the selective processes involved in commercial surrogacy as conveyed by Australian IPs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Anleu, S.R. 1992. Surrogacy: For Love But Not for Money? Gender and Society 6: 30–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bellware, K. 2014. White Woman Who Sued Sperm Bank Over Black Baby Says It’s Not About Race. The Huffington Post, October 3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berkhout, S.G. 2008. Buns in the Oven: Objectification, Surrogacy, and Women’s Autonomy. Social Theory and Practice 34: 95–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blyth, E., and L. Frith. 2009. Donor-Conceived People’s Access to Genetic and Biographical History: An Analysis of Provisions in Different Jurisdictions Permitting Disclosure of Donor Identity. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family 23: 174–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bokek-Cohen, Y.A. 2015. How Do Anonymous Sperm Donors Signal Credibility Through Their Self-Presentations? Health Sociology Review 24: 81–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Castro, E.V. 2012. The Gift and the Given: Three Nano-Essays on Kinship and Magic. In Kinship and Beyond: The Genealogical Model Reconsidered, ed. S.C. Bamford and J. Leach. New York: Berghan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Desai, K. 2012. India, a Designer Baby Factory? First Post, Life. Accessed 6 June 2017. http://www.firstpost.com/living/india-a-designer-baby-factory-327471.html

  • Franklin, S. 2013. Biological Relatives: IVF, Stem Cells, and the Future of Kinship. Durham and London: Duke University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gammeltoft, T.M. 2013. Potentiality and Human Temporality. Current Anthropology 54: S159–S171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gammeltoft, T.M., and A. Wahlberg. 2014. Selective Reproductive Technologies. Annual Review of Anthropology 43: 201–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gell, A. 1988. Technology and Magic. Anthropology Today 4: 6–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Georges, E. 1996. Fetal Ultrasound Imaging and the Production of Authoritative Knowledge in Greece. Medical Anthropology Quarterly 10: 157–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenfeld, D.A., and E. Seli. 2011. Gay Men Choosing Parenthood Through Assisted Reproduction: Medical and Psychosocial Considerations. Fertility and Sterility 95: 225–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, J.A. 2006. Towards Transnational Feminisms: Some Reflections and Concerns in Relation to the Globalization of Reproductive Technologies. European Journal of Women’s Studies 13: 23–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, E. 2010. Worker Identity, Agency and Economic Development, Womens Empowerment in the Indian Informal Economy. London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inhorn, M.C., and S. Tremayne. 2016. Islam, Assisted Reproduction, and the Bioethical Aftermath. Journal of Religion and Health 55: 422–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirkman, L. 2010. The Good Sense About Surrogacy. Viewpoint [Online] 2: 20–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kroløkke, C.H. 2011. Biotourist Performances: Doing Parenting During the Ultrasound. Text and Performance Quarterly 31: 15–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levine, A.D. 2010. Self-Regulation, Compensation, and the Ethical Recruitment of Oocyte Donors. Hastings Center Report 40: 25–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marcus, G.E. 1995. Ethnography in/of the World System: The Emergence of Multi-Sited Ethnography. Annual Review of Anthropology 24: 95–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markens, S. 2007. Surrogate Motherhood and the Politics of Reproduction. Berkeley, Los Angeles, and California: University of California Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • McCandless, J. 2005. Recognition of Family Diversity: The ‘Boundaries’ of RE G. Feminist Legal Studies 13: 323–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDougall, L. 2014. The Biomagical Vulva: A ‘Clean Slit’. PhD, Macquarie University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Millbank, J. 2011. The New Surrogacy Parentage Laws in Australia: Cautious Regulation or ‘25 Brick Walls’? Melbourne University Law Review 35: 165.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2014. Identity Disclosure and Information Sharing in Donor Conception Regimes: The Unfulfilled Potential of Voluntary Registers. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family 28: 223–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munjal-Shankar, D. 2014. Identifying the “Real Mother” in Commercial Surrogacy in India. Gender, Technology and Development 18: 387–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norton, W., N. Hudson, and L. Culley. 2013. Gay Men Seeking Surrogacy to Achieve Parenthood. Reproductive BioMedicine Online 27: 271–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Novakovic, B., and R. Saffery. 2012. The Ever Growing Complexity of Placental Epigenetics—Role in Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes and Fetal Programming. Placenta 33: 959–970.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pande, A. 2009. ‘It May be Her Eggs But It’s My Blood’: Surrogates and Everyday Forms of Kinship in India. Qualitative Sociology 32: 379–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinborg, A., A. Loft, L.B. Romundstad, U.-B. Wennerholm, V. Söderström-Anttila, C. Bergh, and K. Aittomäki. 2016. Epigenetics and Assisted Reproductive Technologies. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 95: 10–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ragoné, H. 1994. Surrogate Motherhood: Conceptions of the Heart. Boulder and Oxford: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1996. Chasing the Blood Tie: Surrogate Mothers, Adoptive Mothers and Fathers. American Ethnologist 23: 352–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ravelingien, A., V. Provoost, E. Wyverkens, A. Buysse, P. De Sutter, and G. Pennings. 2015. Lesbian Couples’ Views About and Experiences of Not Being Able to Choose Their Sperm Donor. Culture, Health and Sexuality 17: 592–606.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowland, R. 1992. Living Laboratories: Women and Reproductive Technologies. Sydney: Spinifex Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sifris, A. 2015. The Family Courts and Parentage of Children Conceived Through Overseas Commercial Surrogacy Arrangements: A Child-Centred Approach. Journal of Law and Medicine 23: 396.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swan, N. 1990. Australian Ethics Committee Approves Surrogacy. British Medical Journal (Clinical Research Ed.) 301: 254.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teman, E. 2010a. Birthing a Mother. The Surrogate Body and the Pregnant Self. Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London: University of California Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2010b. My Bun, Her Oven. Anthropology Now 2: 33–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whittaker, A. 2015. Thai In Vitro: Gender, Culture and Assisted Reproduction. New York: Berghahn.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whyte, S., and B. Torgler. 2015. Selection Criteria in the Search for a Sperm Donor: Behavioural Traits Versus Physical Appearance. Journal of Bioeconomics 17: 151–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whyte, S., B. Torgler, and K.L. Harrison. 2016. What Women Want in Their Sperm Donor: A Study of More than 1000 Women’s Sperm Donor Selections. Economics and Human Biology 23: 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams-Jones, B. 2002. Commercial Surrogacy and the Redefinition of Motherhood. The Journal of Philosophy, Science and Law 2: 13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yovich, J. 1988. IVF Surrogacy and Absent Uterus Syndromes. The Lancet (British Edition) 332: 331–332.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zanghellini, A. 2010. Lesbian and Gay Parents and Reproductive Technologies: The 2008 Australian and UK Reforms. Feminist Legal Studies 18: 227–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Technology Sydney, Eastwood, NSW, Australia

    Michaela Stockey-Bridge

Authors
  1. Michaela Stockey-Bridge
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Anthropology, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Ayo Wahlberg

  2. Department of Anthropology, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Tine M. Gammeltoft

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Stockey-Bridge, M. (2018). Technologies of Enchantment: Commercial Surrogacy and Egg Donation in India. In: Wahlberg, A., Gammeltoft, T. (eds) Selective Reproduction in the 21st Century. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58220-7_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58220-7_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-58219-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-58220-7

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation