Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

A Transnational Feminist View of Surrogacy Biomarkets in India pp 161–172Cite as

Transnational Feminism for Reproductive Justice

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 834 Accesses

Abstract

Assisted reproductive technologies have provided a wide range of choices and opportunities for people to have children using genetics of their choice (either their own genetics or others). These technologies can also be used in ways that are harmful to communities with lower access to resources and power. An analytical framework using stratified reproduction in the context of surrogacy in India reveals that some individuals gain reproductive empowerment at the cost of the health and even life of some other women based on inequalities. The reproductive rights framework is inadequate in understanding this stratification. Scholars and activists have rigorously engaged in debates and discourse through their writings regarding women’s agency and their broader social empowerment from a variety of critical perspectives especially keeping in view the structural inequalities social injustice in the commercial markets of reproductive labour, babies, and bodies. In recent years, several scholars have suggested the reproductive justice framework as a way forward towards understanding and addressing such social and global injustice (Mohapatra in Ann Health Law 21(1):191–200, 2012; Roberts in Signs 34(4):783–804, 2009; Jesudason and Kimport in Front J Women Stud 34(3):213–225, 2013; Luna and Luker in Ann Rev Law Soc Sci 9:327–352, 2013; Gupta in IJFAB Int J Fem Approaches Bioeth 5:25–51, 2012; Galpern, Presentation for SisterSong’s “Let’s Talk About Sex” Conference, Chicago, IL, 2007; Bailey in Hypatia 26:715–741, 2011; Fixmer-Oraiz in J Women Stud 34(3):126–163, 2013; West in Yale Law J 1394–1432, 2009; Gaard in Eth Environ 15(2):103–129, 2010; Donchin in Bioethics 24(7):323–332, 2010; Callahan and Roberts in Faculty Scholarship, Paper 1155, 1996; Dickenson in Bioethics 15(3):205–217, 2001). Building on this scholarship, I examine a possible strategic pathway to take this forward by drawing on the reproductive justice framework towards a transnational feminist solidarity that recognizes the intersectionality of structural social oppressions operating through historic systems of postcolonial and neocolonial domination.

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

References

  • ACRJ. 2005. A new vision for advancing our movement for reproductive health, reproductive rights and reproductive justice. Oakland, CA: Asian Communities for Reproductive Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, Alison. 2011. Reconceiving surrogacy: Toward a reproductive justice account of Indian surrogacy. Hypatia 26: 715–741.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callahan, Joan C., and Dorothy E. Roberts. 1996. A feminist social justice approach to reproduction-assisting technologies: A case study on the limits of liberal theory. Faculty Scholarship. Paper 1155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cherry, April L. 2014. The rise of the reproductive brothel in the global economy: Some thoughts on reproductive tourism, autonomy, and justice. 17 U. Pa. J.L. & Soc. Change 257: 269–271.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deomampo, Daisy. 2013. Transnational surrogacy in India: Interrogating power and women′s agency. Frontiers 34 (3): 167–188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dickenson, Donna. 2001. Property and womens alienation from their own reproductive labour. Bioethics 15 (3): 205–217.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donchin, A. 2010. Reproductive tourism and the quest for global gender justice. Bioethics 24 (7): 323–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Court of Human Rights. 2017. Strasbourg. http://www.echr.coe.int/Pages/home.aspx?p=home.

  • Fixmer-Oraiz, Natalie. 2013. Speaking of solidarity: Transnational gestational surrogacy and the rhetorics of reproductive (in)justice. Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies 34 (3): 126–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frankenberg, Ruth. 1993. White women, race matters: The social construction of whiteness, 304. University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaard, Greta. 2010. Reproductive technology, or reproductive justice?: An ecofeminist, environmental justice perspective on the rhetoric of choice. Ethics & the Environment 15 (2), 103–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galpern, Emily, Mia Mingus, and Cara Page. 2007. Surviving ourselves: Unpacking reproductive justice, genetic technologies and eugenics. In Presentation for SisterSong’s “Let’s Talk About Sex” Conference, Chicago, IL, June 1, 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghimire, D.J., W.G. Axinn, S.T. Yabiku and A. Thoirnton. 2006. Social change, premarital nonfamily experience, and spouse choice in an arranged marriage society. American Journal of Sociology 111: 1181–1218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grewal, I., and C. Kaplan. 1994. Scattered hegemonies: Post-modernity and transnational Feminists Practices. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, J. 2012. Reproductive biocrossings: Indian egg donors and surrogates in the globalized fertility market. IJFAB: International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 5: 25–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hampton, Tracy. 2010. Child marriage threatens girl’s health. JAMA, The Journal of the American Medical Association 304 (5): 509–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jesudason, Sujatha, and Katrina Kimport. 2013. Decentering the individual and centering community: Using a reproductive justice methodology to examine the uses of reprogenetics. Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies 34 (3): 213–225.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, Renate. 2017. Surrogacy: A human rights violation. Melbourne: Spinifex Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langlois, A. 2009. Normative and theoretical foundations of human rights. In: Human rights: Politics and practise, ed. by M. Goodhart. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luna, Zakiya, and Kristin Luker. 2013. Reproductive justice. Annual Review of Law and Social Science 9: 327–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mackie, Vera. 2001. The language of globalization, transnationality and feminism. International Feminist Journal of Politics 3: 180–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mies, M., and V. Shiva. 1993. Ecofeminism. London: Zed.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohanty, C.T. 1986. Under western eyes: Feminist scholarship and colonial discourses. Boundary 2 (12): 333–358.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohanty, C.T. 2003. “Under western eyes” revisited: Feminist solidarity through anticapitalist struggles. Signs 28: 499–535.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohapatra, Seema. 2012. Achieving reproductive justice in the international surrogacy market. Annals of Health Law 21 (1): 191–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Okin, Susan Moller. 1998. Feminism, women’s human rights, and cultural differences. Hypatia 13: 32–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pande, A. 2014. Wombs in labor: Transnational commercial surrogacy in India, 252 p. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, Dorothy E. 2009. Race, gender, and genetic technologies: A new reproductive dystopia? Signs 34 (4): 783–804.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothman, Barbara Katz. 1992. Reproductive technologies and surrogacy: A feminist perspective. Creighton Law Review 25: 1599–1616.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rudrappa, S. 2015. Discounted life: The price of global surrogacy. New York: New York University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • SAMA and S. Sharma. 2010. Can we see the baby bump. India: Surfilms.

    Google Scholar 

  • SAMA. 2012. Birthing a market: A study on commercial surrogacy. New Delhi: SAMA-Resource Group for Women and Health.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sangari, Kumkum. 2015. Solid liquid: A (trans)national reproductive formation. Tulika Books: New Delhi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saravanan, S. 2010. Transnational surrogacy and objectification of gestational mothers. Economic and Political Weekly 45: 26–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saravanan, S. 2013. An ethnomethodological approach to examine exploitation in the context of capacity, trust and experience of commercial surrogacy in India. Philosophy, Ethics and Humanities in Medicine 8: 10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scheper-Hughes, N. 2000. The global traffic in human organs. Current Anthropology 41 (2): 191–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sunder Rajan, Rajeswari. 2000. Introduction: Feminism and the politics of resistance. Indian Journal of Gender Studies 7: 153–165.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Rome Petition. 2017. 2nd NGO European meeting on the abolition of surrogacy. 27th February. European Women’s Lobby: piazza di Monte Citorio, Rome.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vora, Kalindi. 2009. Indian transnational surrogacy and the commodification of vital energy. In special issue, Re-tooling subjectivities: Exploring the possible through feminist science studies. Subjectivities 28 (1).

    Google Scholar 

  • Weedon, Chris. 1999. Feminism, theory and the politics of difference. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • West, Robin. 2009. From choice to reproductive justice: De-constitutionalizing abortion rights. The Yale Law Journal 118: 1394–1432.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Anthropology, South Asia Institute, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany

    Sheela Saravanan

Authors
  1. Sheela Saravanan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sheela Saravanan .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Saravanan, S. (2018). Transnational Feminism for Reproductive Justice. In: A Transnational Feminist View of Surrogacy Biomarkets in India. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-6869-0_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-6869-0_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-10-6868-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-10-6869-0

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation