Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T05:24:27.347Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Case for Permitting Altruistic Surrogacy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 March 2020

Brenda M. Baker
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Canada's Royal Commission on New Reproductive Technologies rejects all forms of surrogacy arrangement under the rubric of objecting to commercial surrogacy. Noncommercial surrogacy arrangements, however, can be defended against the commission's objections. They can be viewed as cases of giving a benefit or service to another in a way that expresses benevolence, and establishes a relationship between surrogates and prospective ‘social’ parents that allows mutual understanding and reciprocal personal interaction between them.

Type
Research Article
Information
Hypatia , Volume 11 , Issue 2 , Spring 1996 , pp. 34 - 48
Copyright
Copyright © 1996 by Hypatia, Inc.

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

Anderson, Elizabeth. 1990. Is women's labor a commodity? Philosophy and Public Affairs 19(1): 71–92.Google ScholarPubMed
Andrews, Lori B. 1988. Surrogate motherhood: The challenge to feminists. Law, Medicine and Health Care 16(1–2): 72–80. Reprinted in Surrogate motherhood. See Gostin 1990.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arneson, Richard J. 1992. Commodification and commercial surrogacy. Philosophy and Public Affairs 21(2): 132–164.Google ScholarPubMed
Calhoun, Cheshire. 1988. Justice, care, and gender bias. Journal of Philosophy 85(9): 451–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franks, Darrell D. 1981. Psychiatric evaluation of women in surrogate mother programs. American Journal of Psychiatry 138(10): 1978–9.Google Scholar
General Opinion of the Conseil du Status de la Femme in regard to new reproductive technologies. 1989. Gouvemement de Quebec.Google Scholar
Gilligan, Carol. 1980. In a different voice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Gostin, Larry. 1990. Surrogate motherhood. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Harrison, Beverly Wildung. 1983. Our right to choose: Toward a new ethic of abortion. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Kittay, E. Feder and Meyers, Diana T. eds., 1987. Women and moral theory. Totowa, NJ: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
Krimmel, Herbert T. 1983. The case against surrogate parenting. The Hastings Center Report 13(5): 35–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
MacKinnon, Catharine. 1987. Feminism unmodified. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Nelson, Hilde Lindemann, and Nelson, James Lindemann. 1989. Cutting motherhood in two: Some suspicions concerning surrogacy. Hypatia 4(3): 85–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noddings, Nel. 1984. Caring: A feminist approach to ethics and moral education. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Parker, Philip J. 1983. Motivation of surrogate mothers: Initial findings. Clinical and Research Reports, American Journal of Psychiatry 140(1): 117–18.Google ScholarPubMed
Minister of Government Services Canada. 1993. Proceed with care: Final report of the Royal Commission on New Reproductive Technologies. 2 vols.Google Scholar
Helena, Ragoné. 1994. Surrogate motherhood: Conceptions in the heart. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Raymond, Janice. 1990. Reproductive gifts and gift'giving: The altruistic woman The Hastings Center Report, Nov/Dec, 7–11.Google Scholar
Satz, Debra. 1992. Markets in women's reproductive labor. Phibsophy and Public Affairs 21(2): 107–131.Google ScholarPubMed
Sherwin, Susan. 1992. No longer patient. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Singer, Peter. 1978. Rights and the market. In Justice and economic distribution, ed. Arthur, John, and William, . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Titmuss, Richard M. 1970. The gift relationship. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Tong, Rosemarie. 1990. The overdue death of a feminist chameleon: Taking a stand on surrogacy arrangements. Journal of Social Philosophy 21(2–3): 40–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar