Abstract
In Re D is the most recent in a line of cases to raise problems with the determination of legal fatherhood under s.28(3) of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990. The judgments in In Re D are interesting in particular because they demonstrate the growing currency of the idea that a child has a right to ‘genetic truth’. They also further evidence the ‘fragmentation of fatherhood’. This case is best understood as part of a complex and ongoing negotiation of men’s role in the family in the light of shifting family forms.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Arditti, R., Duelli Klein, R. & Minden, S. (eds.) Test-Tube Women: What Future for Motherhood? (London, Boston: Pandora Press, 1984)
Blackstock, C., “No Need for Fathers in IVF Treatment Says Fertility Chief”, The Guardian (21 January 2004)
Chrisafis, A., “Parenthood Postponed”, The Guardian (20 February 2001)
Dewar J. (1998) “The Normal Chaos of Family Law”. Modern Law Review 61: 467–85
Dolgin J. (1994) “The ‘Intent’ of Reproduction: Reproductive Technologies and the Parent-Child Bond”. Connecticut Law Rev 26/4: 1261–1314
Katz Rothman B. (1990) Recreating Motherhood: Ideology and Technology in a Patriarchal Society. Norton & Co, New York
Laqueur T. (1990) “The Facts of Fatherhood”. In: Hirsch M., Fox Keller E. (eds) Conflicts in Feminism. Routledge, New York and London, pp. 205–221
Lind C. (2005) “Re R (Paternity of IVF Baby) – Unmarried Paternity Under the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990”. Child and Family Law Quarterly 15/3: 327–40
Morgan D.H.J. (1996) Family Connections. Polity Press, Cambridge
Morgan D.H.J. (1999) “Risk and Family Practices: Accounting for Change and Fluidity Family Life”. In: Silva E.B., Smart C. (eds) The New Family?. Sage, London, pp. 13–30
O.N.S. Living in Britain: General Household Survey 2002, available at: http://www.statistics.gov.uk
MacLean M., Richards M. (1999) “Parents and Divorce: Changing Patterns of Public Intervention”. In: Bainham A., Day Sclater S., Richards M. (eds) What is a Parent? A Socio-Legal Analysis. Hart, Oxford, pp. 259–270
Sheldon S. (2005) “Fragmenting Fatherhood: The Regulation of Reproductive Technologies”. Modern Law Review 68/4: 523–553
Shultz, M.M., “Reproductive Technology and Intent-Based Parenthood: An Opportunity for Gender Neutrality”, Wisconsin Law Review 2 (1990), 297–398
Simpson B. (1998) Changing Families: An Ethnographic Approach to Divorce and Separation. Berg, Oxford
Smart C., Neale B. (1999) Family Fragments?. Polity, Cambridge
Stanworth M. (1987) “Reproductive Technologies and the Deconstruction of Motherhood”. In: Stanworth M. (eds) Reproductive Technologies: Gender, Motherhood and Medicine. Polity, Cambridge, pp. 10–35
Steinberg D. (1997) Bodies in Glass: Genetics, Eugenics Embryo Ethics. Manchester University Press, Manchester
Wallbank J. (2004) “The Role of Rights and Utility in Instituting a Child’s Right to Know Her Genetic History”. Social and Legal Studies 13/2: 245–64
Acknowledgments
I am grateful to the E.S.R.C. for funding the research on which this case note draws, and to Sue Millns and Emily Haslam for their comments on an earlier draft.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sheldon, S. Reproductive technologies and the legal determination of fatherhood. Feminist Legal Stud 13, 349–362 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10691-005-9008-4
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10691-005-9008-4