Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-30T05:39:29.764Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

6 - The Effect of Jewish-Israeli Family Ideology on Policy Regarding Reproductive Technologies

from Part II - Familialism and Reproduction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 December 2017

Hagai Boas
Affiliation:
Tel Aviv University Center for Ethics
Yael Hashiloni-Dolev
Affiliation:
The Academic College of Tel Aviv Yaffo, School of Government and Society
Nadav Davidovitch
Affiliation:
Ben Gurion University Department of Health Systems Management
Dani Filc
Affiliation:
Ben Gurion University
Shai J. Lavi
Affiliation:
Tel Aviv University Faculty of Law
Get access

Summary

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
Bioethics and Biopolitics in Israel
Socio-legal, Political, and Empirical Analysis
, pp. 119 - 138
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2018

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ackelsberg, M. A. (1995). Jewish Family Ethics in a Post-halachic Age. In Dorff, E. N. and Newman, L. E. (Eds.), Contemporary Jewish Ethics and Morality: A Reader (pp. 3315). New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ahluwalia, U. and Arora, M. (2011). Posthumous Reproduction and Its Legal Perspective. International Journal of Infertility and Fetal Medicine, 2(1), 914. doi:10.5005/jp-journals-10016-1010.Google Scholar
American Society for Reproductive Medicine – Ethics Committee. (2013). Posthumous Collection and Use of Reproductive Tissue: A Committee Opinion. Fertility & Sterility, 99, 18421845.Google Scholar
Bahadur, G. (2002). Death and Conception. Human Reproduction, 17(10), 27692775.Google Scholar
Balswick, J. (1966). Are American-Jewish Families Closely Knit? A Review of the Literature. Jewish Social Studies, 28(3), 159167.Google Scholar
Barilan, M. Y. (2005). “Biomedical Ethics and Halakha” and “Abortion.” In Neusner, J. et al. (Eds.), The Encyclopedia of Judaism, second ed. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Beit-Hallahmi, B. (1981). The Kibbutz Family: Revival or Survival. Journal of Family Issues, 2(3), 259.Google Scholar
Birenbaum-Carmeli, D. (2004). Prevalence of Jews as Subjects in Genetic Research: Figures, Explanation, and Potential Implications. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 130A(1), 7683.Google Scholar
Birenbaum-Carmeli, D. and Carmeli, Y. (2010). (Eds.). Kin, Gene, Community: Reproductive Technology among Jewish Israelis. Oxford and New York: Berghahn Books.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, P. (1996). On the Family as a Realized Category. Theory, Culture & Society, 13, 1926.Google Scholar
Braun, K. (2016). “From Ethical Exceptionalism to Ethical Exceptions: The Rule and Exception Model and the Changing Meaning of Ethics in German Bioregulation.” Developing World Bioethics.Google Scholar
Cherlin, A. and Celebuski, C. (1983). Are Jewish Families Different? Some Evidence from the General Social Survey. Journal of Marriage and Family, 45(4), 903910.Google Scholar
Cohen, D. (2013). AG Approves Parents’ Use of Dead Son’s Sperm. New Family. Retrieved from www.newfamily.org.il/en/4989/ag-approves-parents-use-of-dead-sons-sperm-3 (Hebrew).Google Scholar
Cohen-Friedman, N. (2014, December 16). Tomer Passed Away, and a Woman He Did Not Know Will Become the Mother of His Child. Ynet. Retrieved from www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-4603097,00.html (Hebrew).Google Scholar
Conrad, P. (1999). A Mirage of Genes. Sociology of Health & Illness, 21(2), 228241.Google Scholar
Davis, D. S., Gerson, N., Ponsaran, R., and Siminoff, L. A. (2010). Ashkenazi Jews: Overburdened and Overexposed? New Genetics and Society, 29(3), 241260.Google Scholar
Dolgin, J. L. (2000). Choice, Tradition, and the New Genetics: The Fragmentation of the Ideology of Family. Conn Law Rev., 32(2), 523566.Google ScholarPubMed
Donath, O. (2011). Making a Choice: Being Child-Free in Israel. Tel Aviv: Miskal-Yedioth Ahronoth Books (Hebrew).Google Scholar
Duster, T. ([1990] 2003). Backdoor to Eugenics. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Edwards, J. 2000. Born and Bred: Idioms of Kinship and New Technologies in England. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fearon, K. (2016, July 11). A Victory for Consent – But What About the Welfare of the Child? Bionews. Retrieved from www.bionews.org.uk/page_670138.asp.Google Scholar
Feldman, D. M. (1986). Health and Medicine in Jewish Tradition. New York: Crossroad.Google Scholar
Fogiel-Bijaoui, S. (2002). Familism, Postmodernity and the State: The Case of Israel. The Journal of Israeli History, 21(1–2), 3862.Google Scholar
Franklin, S. (1997). Embodied Progress: A Cultural Account of Assisted Conception. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Franklin, S. (1995). Postmodern Procreation: A Cultural Account of Assisted Reproduction. In Ginsburg, F. D. and Rapp, R. (Eds.), Conceiving the New World Order: The Global Politics of Reproduction (pp. 323345). Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Gooldin, S. (2007). Technologies of Happiness: Fertility Management in a Pro-natal Context. In Shenhav, Y. and Yossi, Y. (Eds.), Citizenship Gaps: Migration, Fertility, and Identity (pp. 265302). Jerusalem: Van Leer/Hakibbutz Hameuchad (Hebrew).Google Scholar
Gross, M. L. (1999). After Feticide: Coping with Late-Term Abortion in Israel, Western Europe, and the United States. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 8(04), 449462.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Habermas, J. (2003). The Future of Human Nature. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Hans, J. D. and Frey, L. M. (2013). American Attitudes in Context: Posthumous Use of Cryopreserved Gametes. Journal of Clinical Research & Bioethics, S1–006. doi:10.4172/2155-9627.S1-006.Google Scholar
Hashiloni-Dolev, Y. (2007). A Life (Un)Worthy of Living: Reproductive Genetics in Israel and Germany. International Library of Ethics, Law and the New Medicine, 34. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
Hashiloni-Dolev, Y., Hacker, D., and Boas, H. (2014). The Will of the Deceased: Three Israeli Case Studies. Israeli Sociology, 16(1) (Hebrew).Google Scholar
Hashiloni-Dolev, Y. and Shkedi, S. (2007). On New Reproductive Technologies and Family Ethics: Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD) for Sibling Donors (SD) in Israel and Germany. Social Science and Medicine, 65(10), 20812092.Google Scholar
Hashiloni-Dolev, Y. and Shkedi, S. (2010). The Regulation of Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD) for Sibling Donors in Israel, Germany and England: Balancing Potential Benefits and Risks. In Birenbaum-Carmeli, D. and Carmeli, Y. (Eds.), Kin, Gene, Community: Reproductive Technology among Jewish Israelis (pp. 6183). Oxford/New-York: Berghahn Books.Google Scholar
Hashiloni-Dolev, Y. and Triger, Z. (2016). Between the deceased’s wish and the wishes of his surviving relatives: Posthumous children, patriarchy, pronatalism, and the myth of continuity of the seed. Tel-Aviv University Law Review, 39(3), 661706 (Hebrew).Google Scholar
Hashiloni‐Dolev, Y. and Weiner, N. (2008). New reproductive technologies, genetic counselling and the standing of the fetus: Views from Germany and Israel. Sociology of Health & Illness, 30(7), 10551069.Google Scholar
Heyd, D. (1989). Ethics and Medicine. Tel Aviv, Israel: The Broadcast University, Ministry of Defense Publishing (Hebrew).Google Scholar
Hyman, P. E. (1986). Introduction: Perspectives on the Evolving Jewish Family. In Cohen, S. M. and Hyman, P. E. (Eds.), The Jewish Family: Myths and Reality (pp. 329). New York & London: Holmes & Meyer.Google Scholar
Inhorn, M. C. (2003). Local Babies, Global Science: Gender, Religion, and In Vitro Fertilization in Egypt. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Israel Attorney General. (2003). Retrieving Sperm Post-Mortem and its Use. Retrieved from www.justice.gov.il/NR/rdonlyres/2DCE0B40-B4D6-441F-A792-342A33982AD6/0/12202.pdf (Hebrew).Google Scholar
Ivry, T. (2009). Embodying Culture: Pregnancy in Japan and Israel. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
Jakobovits, I. (1967). Jewish Medical Ethics: A Comparative and Historical Study of the Jewish Religious Attitude to Medicine and its Practice. New York: Bloch.Google Scholar
Jane Doe v. Central District Prosecutor’s Office, Family Court (Petah Tikva) 31344-09-13, Nevo Legal Database (March 18, 2015) (Hebrew).Google Scholar
John Doe v. Jerusalem District Prosecutor’s Office, Family Court (Jerusalem) 27169-11-13 (not published) (Hebrew).Google Scholar
Kaczor, C. R. (2005). The Edge of Life: Human Dignity and Contemporary Bioethics. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
Kahn, S. M. (2000). Reproducing Jews: A Cultural Account of Assisted Conception in Israel. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Kaplan, L. J. and Tong, R. (1996). Controlling our Reproductive Destiny: A Technological and Philosophical Perspective. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kroløkke, C. H. and Adrian, S. W. (2013). Sperm on Ice: Fatherhood and Life after Death. Australian Feminist Studies, 28, 263278.Google Scholar
Krones, T. and Richter, G. (2004). Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis: European Perspectives and the German Situation. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 29, 623640.Google Scholar
Krones, T., Schlüter, E., Neuwohner, E., El Ansari, S., Wissner, T., and Richter, G. (2006). What Is the Preimplantation Embryo? Social Science & Medicine, 63(1), 120.Google Scholar
Landau, R. (1999). Planned Orphanhood. Social Science and Medicine, 49, 185196.Google Scholar
Landau, R. (2004). Posthumous Sperm Retrieval for the Purpose of Later Insemination or IVF in Israel: An Ethical and Psychosocial Critique. Human Reproduction, 19, 19521956.Google Scholar
Lavi, S. (2013, April). The Mourning After: Posthumous Sperm Retrieval and the New Laws of Mourning. Presented as part of the LJST Law & Mourning Lecture Series, Amherst College.Google Scholar
Lavi, S. (2010). The Paradox of Jewish Bioethics in Israel: The Case of Reproductive Technologies. In Voigt, A. (Ed.), Religion in bioethischen Diskursen: Interdisziplinäre, internationale und interreligiöse Perspektiven (pp. 81102). Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Levine, N. E. (2008). Alternative Kinship, Marriage, and Reproduction. Annual Review of Anthropology, 37, 375389.Google Scholar
Levine, N. M. (1994). Abortion in Israel: Community, Rights, and the Context of Compromise. Law & Social Inquiry, 19(2), 313336.Google Scholar
Lippman, A. (1992). Led (Astray) by Genetic Maps: The Cartography of the Human Genome and Health Care. Social Science & Medicine, 35(12), 14691476.Google Scholar
Modell, J. (1989). Last Chance Babies: Interpretations of Parenthood in an In Vitro Fertilization Program. Medical Anthropology Quarterly, 3(2), 124138.Google Scholar
Mor-Yosef National Committee. (2012). Recommendations of the Public Commission Regarding Examination of Legislative Regulation: Theme of Fertility and Birth in Israel. Retrieved from www.health.gov.il/publicationsfiles/bap2012.pdf (Hebrew).Google Scholar
Morag-Levine, N. (1994). Abortion in Israel: Community, Rights and the Context of Compromise. Law and Social Inquiry, 19(2), 313335.Google Scholar
M. P. v. Israel Ministry of Health, Family Court (Jerusalem) 28130-07-14, Nevo Legal Database (Nov. 17, 2014) (Hebrew).Google Scholar
Nye, R. A. (2003). The Evolution of the Concept of Medicalization in the Late Twentieth Century. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 39(2), 115129.Google Scholar
Parens, E. and Asch, A. (Eds.). (2000). Prenatal Testing and Disability Rights. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Pennings, G., de Wert, G., Shenfield, F., Cohen, J., Devroey, P., and Tarlatzis, B. (2006). ESHRE Task Force on Ethics and Law 11: Posthumous Assisted Reproduction. Human Reproduction, 21, 30503053.Google Scholar
Prainsack, B. and Firestine, O. (2006). “Science for Survival”: Biotechnology Regulation in Israel. Science and Public Policy, 33(1), 3346.Google Scholar
Rapp, R. (1999). Testing Women, Testing the Fetus: The Social Impact of Amniocentesis in America (pp. 118128). New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ravitsky, V. (2004). Posthumous Reproduction Guidelines in Israel. The Hastings Center Report, 34(2), 67.Google Scholar
Raz, A. E. (2010). Community Genetics and Genetic Alliances: Eugenics, Carrier Testing, and Networks of Risk. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Raz, A. E. (2004). Important to Test, Important to Support: Attitudes toward Disability Rights and Prenatal Diagnosis among Leaders of Support Groups for Genetic Disorders in Israel. Social Science & Medicine, 59(9), 18571866.Google Scholar
Raz, A. E. and Schicktanz, S. (2016). Comparative Empirical Bioethics: Dilemmas of Genetic Testing and Euthanasia in Israel and Germany. Springer, 2016.Google Scholar
Raz, A. E., Schues, C., Wilhelm, N., and Rehmann-Sutter, C. (2016). Saving or Subordinating Life? Popular Views in Israel and Germany of Donor Siblings Created through PGD. Journal of Medical Humanities, 37(1), 117. doi:10.1007/s10912-016-9388-2.Google Scholar
Raz, A. E. and Vizner, Y. (2008). Carrier Matching and Collective Socialization in Community Genetics: Dor Yeshorim and the Reinforcement of Stigma. Social Science & Medicine, 67(9), 13611369.Google Scholar
Remennick, L. (2006). The Quest for the Perfect Baby: Why Do Israeli Women Seek Prenatal Genetic Testing? Sociology of Health & Illness, 28(1), 2153.Google Scholar
Rimon-Greenspan, H. and Ravitsky, V. (2013). New Frontiers in Posthumous Reproduction. BioNews. Retrieved from www.bionews.org.uk/page_313451.asp?hlight=Ravitsky.Google Scholar
Rimon-Zarfaty, N. (2014). The Influence of New Medical Technologies on Perceptions of the “Fetus” and “Parenthood” among Israeli Parents (Doctoral dissertation). Ben-Gurion University of the Negev (Hebrew).Google Scholar
Rothbell, G. (1986). The Jewish Mother: Social Construction of a Popular Image. In Cohen, S. M. and Hyman, P. E. (Eds.), The Jewish Family: Myths and Reality. New York and London: Holmes & Meyer.Google Scholar
Sandel, M. (2007). The Case Against Perfection. Cambridge. MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Sawicki, J. (1999). Disciplining Mothers: Feminism and the New Reproductive Technologies. In Price, J. and Shildrick, M. (Eds.), Feminist Theory and the Body: A Reader (pp.190202). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Scully, J. L., Shakespeare, T., and Banks, S. (2006). Gift not Commodity? Lay People Deliberating Social Sex Selection. Sociology of Health & Illness, 28(6), 749767.Google Scholar
Shahar et al. v. Israeli Attorney General, Family Court (Petah Tikva) 16699-06-13 (Sept. 28, 2016) (Hebrew).Google Scholar
Shalev, C. (2002). Posthumous Insemination: May He Rest in Peace. Medical Law, 27, 9699 (Hebrew).Google Scholar
Shamgar-Handelman, L. and Bar-Yosef, R. (1991). Families in Israel. Jerusalem: Academon. Introduction (Hebrew).Google Scholar
Sher, C., Romano‐Zelekha, O., Green, M. S., and Shohat, T. (2003). Factors Affecting Performance of Prenatal Genetic Testing by Israeli Jewish Women. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 120A(3), 418422.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sherwood, H. (2011). Israeli Couple Seek Right to Use Dead Son’s Sperm. The Guardian. Retrieved from www.theguardian.com/world/2011/feb/08/israeli-parents-dead-son-sperm.Google Scholar
Strathern, M. (1996). Enabling Identity? Biology, Choice and the New Reproductive Technologies. In Hall, S. and Du Gay, P. (Eds.), Questions of Cultural Identity (pp. 751). London: Sage.Google Scholar
Teman, E. (2003). The Medicalization of “Nature” in the “Artificial Body”: Surrogate Motherhood in Israel. Medical Anthropology Quarterly, 17(l), 7898.Google Scholar
Tremellen, K., Savulescu, J., 2015. A Discussion Supporting Presumed Consent for Posthumous Sperm Procurement and Conception. Reprod Biomed Online 30, 613.Google Scholar
Weiss, M. (2002). The Chosen Body: The Politics of the Body in Israeli Society. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Wertz, D. C. (1998). Eugenics Is Alive and Well: A Survey of Genetic Professionals around the World. Science in Context, 11(3–4), 493510.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×