Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Conceptions and Misconceptions

Social Representations of Medically Assisted Reproduction

  • Chapter
Social Representations and Identity

Abstract

Infertility and its treatment is a social issue in most Western countries. As many as one couple in seven will have difficulty becoming pregnant when they want to. Medical interventions to assist reproduction have developed rapidly over the last four decades so that it is now possible for many couples to become pregnant when once they would have remained childless. Many such interventions rely on the use of donated sperm, eggs, or embryos. Along with the rapid development of new medical technologies, there is now a sizable industry of counselors working in the area (Burns 1993; Daniels 1993), and legislation and policy to control the fertility industry exist in many states and countries, including Australia (Broderick 2005a, 2005b). Academics have turned their attentions to studies of the stresses experienced by people undergoing medically assisted reproductive technology (MART) procedures (for example, Edelman, Connolly, and Bartlett 1994; Wasser 1994), of the wisdom of telling a child of the circumstances of its conception (for example, Broderick and Walker 1995; Daniels and Taylor 1993; Savage 1995), and of the gender politics involved (for example, Abbey, Andrews, and Halman 1991; Haimes 1993). MART technologies, perhaps especially when they involve donated gametes and embryos, raise many psychological, social, legal, ethical, and political dilemmas. Infertility and the technologies used to overcome it are public issues as well as private concerns.

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 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
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

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Abbey, A., F. M. Andrews, and L. J. Halman. 1991. Gender’s role in responses to infertility. Psychology of Women Quarterly 15: 295–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abric, J. C. 1993. Central system, peripheral system: Their functions and roles in the dynamics of social representations. Papers on Social Representations 2: 75–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Augoustinos, M., I. Walker, and N. Donaghue. 2006. Social cognition: An integrated approach. 2nd ed. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broderick, P. 2005. Disclosure and child development: What we think we know, what we really know, and what we need to know. Invited paper presented for the American Society for Reproductive Medicine Mental Health Professional Group Annual Meeting Postgraduate Course “Counseling couples about collaborative reproduction: Ethical, cultural and psychological dimensions of parenthood following ART.” Montreal, Quebec, October 15–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broderick, P. 2005. Lessons from down under: Can behavior be legislated? Invited paper presented for the American Society for Reproductive Medicine Mental Health Professional Group Annual Meeting Postgraduate Course: “Counseling couples about collaborative reproduction: Ethical, cultural and psychological dimensions of parenthood following ART.” Montreal, Quebec, October 15–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broderick, P. and I. Walker. 1995. Information access and donated gametes: How much do we know about who wants to know? Human Reproduction 10: 101–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broderick, P. and I. Walker. 2001. Donor gametes and embryos: Who wants to know what about whom, and why? Politics and the Life Sciences 20: 29–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broderick, P. and Walker, I. 2003. The birth of understandings: Social representations and medically assisted conception. A paper presented at The Third Talk-In-Interaction Conference: Talking Health. Rockingham, WA, December 15–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burns, L. H. 1993. An overview of the psychology of infertility. Psychological Issues in Infertility 4: 433–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, V. 2001. What about the children? Arguments against lesbian and gay parenting. Women’s Studies International Forum 24: 555–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Correia, H., P. Broderick, and I. Walker. 2007. Access to reproductive technologies by single women and lesbians: Social representations and public debate. In submission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daniels, K. R. 1987. Semen donors in New Zealand: Their characteristics and attitudes. Clinical Reproduction and Fertility 5: 177–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daniels, K. R. 1988. Attitudes to donor insemination and IVF—a community perspective. New Zealand Social Work Review 1: 4–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daniels, K. R. 1993. Infertility counselling: The need for a psychosocial perspective. British Journal of Social Work 23: 501–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daniels, K. R. and K. Taylor. 1993. Secrecy and openness in donor insemination. Politics and the Life Sciences 12: 155–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Rosa, A. 1987. The social representations of mental illness in children and adults. In Current issues in European social psychology, vol. 1, ed. W. Doise and S. Moscovici, 47–138. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; Paris: Editions de la Maison des Sciences de l’Homme.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doise, W. 2001. Human rights studied as normative social representations. In Representations of the social: Bridging theoretical traditions, ed. K. Deaux and G. Philogène, 96–112. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durrant, J., M. W. Bauer, and G. Gaskell. 1998. Biotechnology in the public sphere: A European sourcebook. London: Science Museum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edelman, R. J., K. J. Connolly, and H. Bartlett. 1994. Coping strategies and psychological adjustment of couples presenting for IVF. Journal of Psychosomatic Research 38: 355–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flament, C. 1994. Consensus, salience and necessity in social representations: Technical note. Papers on Social Representations 3:97–105. http://www.psr.jku.at/PSR1994/3_1994Flam1.pdf (accessed November 20, 2002).

    Google Scholar 

  • Haimes, E. 1993. Issues of gender in gamete donation. Social Science and Medicine 36: 85–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herzlich, C. 1973. Health and illness: A social psychological analysis. London: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Humphrey, M. and H. Humphrey. 1986. A fresh look at genealogical bewilderment. British Journal of Medical Psychology 59: 133–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jodelet, D. 1991. Madness and social representations. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jovchelovitch, S. 2001. Social representations, public life, and social construction. In Representations of the social: Bridging theoretical traditions, ed. K. Deaux and G. Philogène, 165–82. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moloney, G., R. Hall, and I. Walker. 2005. Social representations and themata: The construction and functioning of social knowledge about donation and transplantation. British Journal of Social Psychology 44: 415–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Purkhardt, S. C. 1993. Transforming social representations: A social psychology of common sense and science. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sants, H. J. 1964. Genealogical bewilderment in children with substitute parents. British Journal of Medical Psychology 37: 133–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Savage, O. M. N. 1995. Secrecy still the best policy: Donor insemination in Cameroon. Politics and the Life Sciences 14: 87–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snowdon, R. 1990. The family and artificial reproduction. In Philosophical ethics in reproductive medicine, ed. D. R. Bromham, M. E. Dalton, and J. C. Jackson, 70–185. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sorosky, A. D., A. Baran, and R. Pannor. 1975. Identity conflicts in adoptees. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 45: 18–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stanworth, M. 1987. Reproductive technologies and the deconstruction of motherhood. In Reproductive technologies: Gender, motherhood, and medicine, ed. M. Stanworth, 10–35. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sverne, T. 1983. Children conceived by artificial insemination. Stockholm: Government of Sweden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Triseliotis, J. 1973. In search of origins: The experiences of adopted people. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, W., N. Kronberger, G. Gaskell, N. Allum, A. Allansdottir, S. Cheveigne, U. Dahinden, et al. 2001. Nature in disorder: The troubled public of biotechnology. In Biotechnology 1996–2000: The years of controversy, ed. G. Gaskell and M. Bauer, 80–95. London: National Museum of Science and Industry.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, I., and P. Broderick. 1999a. The psychology of assisted reproduction, or psychology assisting its reproduction? Australian Psychologist 34: 38–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, I., and P. Broderick. 1999b. Challenges to the reproduction of misunderstanding. Australian Psychologist 34: 221–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warnock, M. A. 1984. Report of the Committee of Inquiry into human fertilization and embryology. London: Department of Health and Social Security.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wasser, S. K. 1994. Psychosocial stress and infertility: Cause or effect? Human Nature 5: 293–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wellisch, E. 1952. Children without geneology: A problem of adoption. Mental Health 13: 41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winkler, R. C., and S. M. Midford. 1986. Biological identity in adoption, artificial insemination by donor (AID) and the new birth technologies. Australian Journal of Early Childhood 11: 43–48.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Iain Walker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pia Broderick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Helen Correia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Coffs Harbour campus of Southern Cross University, NSW, Australia

    Gail Moloney (lecturer) (lecturer)

  2. Murdoch University, Perth, Western Australia, Australia

    Iain Walker (professor of psychology) (professor of psychology)

Copyright information

© 2007 Gail Moloney and Iain Walker

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Walker, I., Broderick, P., Correia, H. (2007). Conceptions and Misconceptions. In: Moloney, G., Walker, I. (eds) Social Representations and Identity. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230609181_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation