Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Kinship
- Cambridge Handbooks in Anthropology
- The Cambridge Handbook of Kinship
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- 1 Introduction: Conceiving Kinship in the Twenty-First Century
- Part I Opening Frameworks
- Part II The (Non)Biological Basis of Relatedness
- Part III Reproducing Society: Gender, Birth, and Power
- Part IV Transnational Connections
- Part V Technological Conceptions
- 21 Surrogate Motherhood and Transforming Families
- 22 Kinship and Assisted Reproductive Technologies: A Middle Eastern Comparison
- 23 A Comparison of Kinship Understandings among Israeli and US Surrogates
- 24 Self, Personhood, and Belonging: The Role of Technology in Childhood Disability
- 25 Paid and Unpaid Labor: Pregnancy and Surrogacy in Anthropological Studies of Reproduction
- Part VI Kinship and the Nation-State
- Index
- References
25 - Paid and Unpaid Labor: Pregnancy and Surrogacy in Anthropological Studies of Reproduction
from Part V - Technological Conceptions
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 April 2019
Edited by
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Kinship
- Cambridge Handbooks in Anthropology
- The Cambridge Handbook of Kinship
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- 1 Introduction: Conceiving Kinship in the Twenty-First Century
- Part I Opening Frameworks
- Part II The (Non)Biological Basis of Relatedness
- Part III Reproducing Society: Gender, Birth, and Power
- Part IV Transnational Connections
- Part V Technological Conceptions
- 21 Surrogate Motherhood and Transforming Families
- 22 Kinship and Assisted Reproductive Technologies: A Middle Eastern Comparison
- 23 A Comparison of Kinship Understandings among Israeli and US Surrogates
- 24 Self, Personhood, and Belonging: The Role of Technology in Childhood Disability
- 25 Paid and Unpaid Labor: Pregnancy and Surrogacy in Anthropological Studies of Reproduction
- Part VI Kinship and the Nation-State
- Index
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of Kinship , pp. 580 - 602Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2019
References
Bailey, Lucy. 2001. “Gender Shows: First-Time Mothers and Embodied Selves.” Gender & Society 15(1): 110–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berend, Zsuzsa. 2010. “Surrogate Losses: Understandings of Pregnancy Loss and Assisted Reproduction among Surrogate Mothers.” Medical Anthropology Quarterly 24(2): 240–262.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bharadwaj, Aditya. 2006. “Sacred Conceptions: Clinical Theodicies, Uncertain Science, and Technologies of Procreation in India.” Culture, Medicine and Psychiatry 30: 451–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birenbaum-Carmeli, Daphna. 2004. “‘Cheaper Than a Newcomer’: On the Political Economy of IVF in Israel.” Sociology of Health and Illness 26(7): 897–924.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corea, Gena. 1985. The Mother Machine: Reproductive Technologies from Artificial Insemination to Artificial Wombs. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Crozier, G. K. D., Johnson, Jennifer L. and Hajzler, Christopher. 2014. “At the Intersections of Emotional and Biological Labor: Understanding Commercial Surrogacy As Social Reproduction.” International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 7(2): 45–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis-Floyd, R. 1992. Birth as an American Rite of Passage. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Deomampo, Daisy. 2013. “Gendered Geographies of Reproductive Tourism.” Gender & Society 27(4): 514–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farquhar, Dion. 1996. The Other Machine: Discourse and Reproductive Technologies. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Franklin, Sarah. 1998. Embodied Progress: A Cultural Account of Assisted Conception. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Franklin, Sarah. 2013. “Conception through a Looking Glass: The Paradox of IVF.” Reproductive Biomedicine Online 27(6): 747–755.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gammeltoft, Tine M. 2014. Haunting Images: A Cultural Account of Selective Reproduction in Vietnam. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Georges, E. 1996. “Fetal Ultrasound Imaging and the Production of Authoritative Knowledge in Greece.” Medical Anthropology Quarterly 10(2): 157–175.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Han, Sallie. 2014. Pregnancy in Practice: Expectation and Experience in the Contemporary US. London: Berghahn Books.Google Scholar
Inhorn, Marcia. 2003. Local Babies, Global Science: Gender, Religion and In Vitro Fertilization in Egypt. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ivry, Tsipy. 2007. “Embodied Responsibilities: Pregnancy in the Eyes of Japanese Ob-Gyns.” Sociology of Health and Illness 29(2): 251–274.Google ScholarPubMed
Ivry, Tsipy. 2010a. Embodying Culture: Pregnancy in Japan and Israel. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
Ivry, Tsipy. 2010b. “Kosher Medicine and Medicalized Halacha: An Exploration of Triadic Relations among Israeli Rabbis, Doctors, and Infertility Patients.” American Ethnologist 37(4): 662–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ivry, Tsipy. 2015. “The Pregnancy Manifesto: Notes on How to Extract Reproduction from the Petri Dish.” Medical Anthropology 34(3): 274–289.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kahn, Susan Martha. 2000. Reproducing Jews: A Cultural Account of Assisted Conception in Israel. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Klein, Renate. 1992. The Ultimate Colonisation: Reproductive and Genetic Engineering. Dublin: Attic Press.Google Scholar
Longhurst, Robyn. 2001. “Breaking Corporeal Boundaries: Pregnant Bodies in Public Places.” In Contested Bodies, ed. Holliday, R. and Hassard, J., 81–94. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mitchell, L. M. 2001. Baby’s First Picture: Ultrasound and the Politics of Fetal Subjects. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan, L. M. 1990. “The Medicalization of Anthropology: A Critical Perspective on the Critical-Clinical Debate.” Social Science and Medicine 30: 945–950.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pande, Amrita. 2009. “It May Be Her Eggs but It Is My Blood: Surrogates and Everyday Forms of Kinship in India.” Qualitative Sociology 32(4): 379–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pande, Amrita. 2010. “Commercial Surrogacy in India: Manufacturing the Perfect Mother Worker.” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 35(4): 969–992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pollack Petchesky, Rosalind. 1987. “Fetal Images: The Power of Visual Culture in the Politics of Reproduction.” Feminist Studies 13(2): 263–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ragoné, Helena. 1994. Surrogate Motherhood: Conception in the Heart. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Ragoné, Helena. 1999. “Surrogate Motherhood, Gamete Donation, and Constructions of Altruism.” In Transformative Motherhood: On Giving and Getting in a Consumer Culture, ed. Layne, L. L., 65–88. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
Rapp, Rayna. 1999. Testing Women, Testing the Fetus: The Social Impact of Amniocentesis in America. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Raymond, Janice G. 1993. Women As Wombs : Reproductive Technologies and the Battle over Women’s Freedom. San Francisco, CA: HarperSanFrancisco.Google Scholar
Roberts, Elizabeth F. S. 1998a. “Examining Surrogacy Discourses: Between Feminine Power and Exploitation.” In Small Wars: The Cultural Politics of Childhood, ed. Scheper-Hughes, N. and Sargent, C. F., 93–110. Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Roberts, Elizabeth F. S. 1998b. “Native Narratives of Connectedness: Surrogate Motherhood and Technology.” In Cyborg Babies: From Techno-Sex to Techno-Tots, ed. Dumit, J. and Davis-Floyd, R., 193–211. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Roberts, Elizabeth F. S. 2012. God’s Laboratory: Assisted Reproduction in the Andes. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rothman, Barbara Katz. 1986. The Tentative Pregnancy: Prenatal Diagnosis and the Future of Motherhood. New York: Viking.Google Scholar
Rothman, Barbara Katz. 1993. The Tentative Pregnancy: How Amniocentesis Changes the Experience of Motherhood. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
Rothman, Barbara Katz. 2000. Recreating Motherhood. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
Rowland, Robyn. 1992. Living Laboratories: Woman and Reproductive Technologies. Bloomington, IN: University of Indiana Press.Google Scholar
Rudrappa, Sharmila. 2009. “Working India’s Reproduction Assembly Line: Surrogacy and Reproductive Rights?” Western Humanities Review 66(3): 77–102.Google Scholar
Rudrappa, Sharmila. 2012. “India’s Reproductive Assembly Line.” Contexts 11(2): 22–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sered, Susan Starr. 2000. What Makes Women Sick?: Maternity, Modesty and Militarism in Israeli Society. Hanover, NH: Brandeis University Press.Google Scholar
Strathern, Marilyn. 1992. Reproducing the Future: Essays on Anthropology, Kinship and the New Reproductive Technologies. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Taylor, Janelle S. 2008. The Public Life of the Fetal Sonogram: Technology, Consumption, and the Politics of Reproduction. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
Teman, Elly. 2008. “The Red String: The Cultural History of a Jewish Folk Symbol.” In Jewishness: Expression, Identity, and Representation, ed. Bronner, S. J., 29–57. Oxford: Littman Library of Jewish Civilization.Google Scholar
Teman, Elly. 2009. “Embodying Surrogate Motherhood: Pregnancy As a Dyadic Body Project.” Body & Society 15(3): 47–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teman, Elly. 2010. Birthing a Mother: The Surrogate Body and the Pregnant Self. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Thompson, Charis. 2005. Making Parents: The Ontological Choreography of Reproductive Technologies. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Vora, Kalindi. 2012. “Limits of ‘Labor’: Accounting for Affect and the Biological in Transnational Surrogacy and Service Work.” South Atlantic Quarterly 111(2): 681–700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vora, Kalindi. 2013. “Potential, Risk, and Return in Transnational Indian Gestational Surrogacy.” Current Anthropology 54(7): s97–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar