Abouzahr, C., ‘Antepartum and postpartum haemorrhage’ in Murray, C. J. L. and Lopez, A. D. (eds), Health Dimensions of Sex and Reproduction (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998), pp. 172–74Google Scholar

Alberta, Hillary B., Berry, Roberta M., and Levine, Aaron D., ‘Risk disclosure and the recruitment of oocyte donors: are advertisers telling the full story?’ (2014) 42 Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 232–43Google Scholar

Allan, Sonia, ‘Surrogate mother cares for baby abandoned because of Down Syndrome’, Biopolitical Times, 4 August 2014, accessed 21 August 2014, www.biopoliticaltimes.rsvp1.com/article.php?id=7953&mgh=www.biopoliticaltimes.org&mgf=1Google Scholar

Allen, Anita L., ‘Surrogacy, slavery, and the ownership of life’ (1990) 13 Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy 139–50Google Scholar

Almeling, Rene, Sex Cells: The Medical Market in Eggs and Sperm (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), Opinion Number 183, Routine Storage of Umbilical Cord Blood for Potential Future Transplantation (Washington, DC: ACOG, 1997)Google Scholar

Anderson, Elizabeth, ‘Is women's labor a commodity?’ (1990) 19 Philosophy and Public Affairs 71–92Google Scholar

Anderson, Elizabeth, Value in Ethics and Economics (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993)Google Scholar

Andorno, Roberto, ‘Population genetic databases: a new challenge to human rights’ in Lenk, Christian, Hoppe, Nils and Andorno, Roberto (eds), Ethics and Law of Intellectual Property: Current Problems in Politics, Science and Technology (Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 2006), Chapter 2Google Scholar

Andrews, Lori B., ‘Control and compensation: laws regulating extracorporeal generative materials’ (1989) 14 Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 541–60Google Scholar

Andrews, Lori B., ‘Beyond doctrinal boundaries: a legal framework for surrogate motherhood’ (1995) 81 Virginia Law Review 2343–75Google Scholar

Andrews, Lori B., ‘Genes and patent policy: rethinking intellectual property rights’ (2002) 3 Nature Reviews Genetics 803–8Google Scholar

Andrews, Lori B., ‘Harnessing the benefits of biobanks’ (2005) 33 Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 1Google Scholar

Andrews, Lori B., ‘Shared patenting experiences: the role of patients’, paper presented at the fifth workshop of the European Commission PropEur project, Bilbao, December 2005Google Scholar

Angrist, Misha, ‘Eyes wide open: the personal genome project, citizen science and veracity in informed consent’ (2009) 6 Personalized Medicine 691CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Annas, George J., ‘Waste and longing: the legal status of placental blood banking’ (1999) 340 New England Journal of Medicine 1521–24Google Scholar

Arendt, Hannah, The Human Condition (2nd edn, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998)Google Scholar

Aristotle, , ‘The generation of animals’ (trans. Ogle, W.) in McKeon, R. (ed.), The Basic Works of Aristotle (New York: Random House, 1941), pp. 665–88Google Scholar

Armitage, S., Warwick, R., Fehily, D., Navarrete, C. and Contreras, M., ‘Cord blood banking in London: the first 1000 collections’ (1999) 24 Bone Marrow Transplant 139–45Google Scholar

Arneson, Richard, ‘Lockean self-ownership: towards a demolition’ (1991) 39 Political Studies 54Google Scholar

Arneson, Richard, ‘Commodification and commercial surrogacy’ (1992) 21(2) Philosophy and Public Affairs 132–64Google Scholar

Attas, Daniel, ‘Freedom and self-ownership’ (2000) 26 Social Theory and Practice 1–23Google Scholar

Aubry, C. M. and Rau, F. F., Cours de droit civil français (Brussels: Méline, Cans, 1850)Google Scholar

Ayme, Segolene, Matthijs, Gert and Soini, S., ‘Patenting and licensing in genetic testing: recommendations of the European Society of Human Genetics’ (2008) 16 European Journal of Human Genetics 405–11CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Baghari, Alireza, ‘Compensated kidney exchange: a review of the Iranian model’ (2006) 16 Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 269–82Google Scholar

Ball, Nan T., ‘The reemergence of Enlightenment ideas in the 1994 French bioethics debates’ (2000) 50 Duke Law Journal 545–87Google Scholar

Ballen, Karen, ‘Challenges in umbilical cord blood stem cell banking for stem cell reviews and reports’ (2010) 6(8) Stem Cell Review and Reports 8–14CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Barker, Juliet N. and Wagner, John E., ‘Umbilical-cord blood transplantation for the treatment of cancer’ (2003) 3 Nature Reviews Cancer 526–32CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Barker, J. N., Weisdorf, D. J., DeFor, T. E. et al., ‘Rapid and complete donor chimerism in adult recipients of unrelated donor umbilical cord blood transplantation after reduced-intensity conditioning’ (2003) 102 Blood 1915–19Google Scholar

Barrett, Ann, Roques, Tom and Small, Matthew, ‘How much will Herceptin really cost?’ (2006) 333 British Medical Journal 1118–20CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Baud, Jean-Pierre, L'affaire de la main volée: une histoire juridique du corps (Paris: Éditions du Seuil, 1993)Google Scholar

Baylis, Francoise, ‘Animal eggs for stem cell research: a path not worth taking’ (2008) 8 American Journal of Bioethics 18–32Google Scholar

Baylis, Francoise, ‘For love or money? The saga of the Korean women who provided eggs for stem cell research’ (2009) 30 Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 385–96Google Scholar

Baylis, Francoise, ‘The ethics of creating children with three genetic parents’ (2013) 26 Reproductive Biomedicine Online 531Google Scholar

Baylis, Francoise and McLeod, Carolyn, ‘The stem cell debate continues: the buying and selling of eggs for research’ (2007) 33 Journal of Medical Ethics 726–31Google Scholar

Baylis, Francoise and Roberts, J. S., ‘Radical rupture: exploring biological sequelae of volitional inheritable genetic modification’ in Rasko, J. E. J., O'Sullivan, G. M. and Ankeny, R. A. (eds), The Ethics of Inheritable Genetic Modification (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), pp. 131–48Google Scholar

Beauchamp, Tom L. and Childress, James F., Principles of Biomedical Ethics (3rd edn, New York: Oxford University Press, 1989)Google Scholar

Becker, Gary S., A Treatise on the Family (enlarged edn, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1991)Google Scholar

Beeson, Diane, ‘Dangerous harvest’, Council for Responsible Genetics, Genewatch, www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.org/genewatch/GeneWatchPage.aspx?pageId=312, accessed 13 June 2016Google Scholar

Beeson, Diane, Darnovsky, Marcy and Lippman, Abby, ‘What's in a name? Variations in terminology of third-party reproduction’ (2015) 31 Reproductive Biomedicine Online 805–14Google Scholar

Bellivier, Florence and Noiville, Christine, ‘The commercialisation of human biomaterials: what are the rights of donors of biological materials?’, paper presented at seminar at Faculté de Droit, Université de Paris-I, October 2004Google Scholar

Bellivier, Florence and Noiville, Christine, ‘La circulation du vivant humain: modèle de la propriéte óu du contrat?’, paper presented at seminar at Faculté de Droit, Université de Paris-I, October 2004Google Scholar

Berg, Jessica W., ‘Risky business: evaluating oocyte donation’ (2001) 1(4) American Journal of Bioethics 18–19Google Scholar

Bertomeu, Maria Julia and Sommer, Susanna E., ‘Patents on genetic material: a new originary accumulation’ in Tong, Rosemarie, Donchin, Anne and Dodds, Susan (eds), Linking Visions: Feminist Bioethics, Human Rights and the Developing World (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2004), pp. 183–202Google Scholar

Beskow, Laura M., Namey, Emily E., Cadigan, R. Jean et al, ‘Research participants’ perspectives on genotype-driven research recruitment’ (2011) 6(4) Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics 3–20CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Best, E., The Maori, vol. 1 (Wellington, New Zealand: The Polynesian Society, 1941)Google Scholar

Beyleveld, Derek and Brownsword, Roger, ‘Patenting human genes: legality, morality and human rights’ in Harris, J. W. (ed.), Property Problems: From Genes to Pension Funds (London: Kluwer Law International, 1997), pp. 9–24Google Scholar

Bjorkman, Barbro, ‘Why we are not allowed to sell that which we are encouraged to donate’ (2006) 15 Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 60–70Google Scholar

Bjorkman, B. and Hansson, B. O., ‘Bodily rights and property rights’ (2006) 32 Journal of Medical Ethics 209–14Google Scholar

Bodri, D., Guillen, J. J., Polo, A. et al., ‘Complications resulting from oocyte stimulation and oocyte retrieval in 4,052 oocyte donor cycles’ (2008) 17(2) Reproductive Biomedicine Online 237–43Google Scholar

Boggio, Andrea, ‘Charitable trusts and human research genetic databases: the way forward?’ (2005) 1(2) Genomics, Society and Policy 41–49Google Scholar

Boseley, Sarah, ‘NHS to scrap single database of patients’ medical details’ (2016) The Guardian, 5 July, www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jul/06/nhs-to-scrap-single-database-of-patients-medical-details, accessed 2 August 2016Google Scholar

Bostyn, S. J. R., ‘One patent a day keeps the doctor away? Patenting human genetic information and health care’ (2000) 7 European Journal of Health Law 229–64Google Scholar

Bovenberg, Jasper A., ‘Towards an international system of ethics and governance for biobanks: a “special status” for genetic data?’ (2005) 15(4) Critical Public Health 369–83Google Scholar

Bovenberg, Jasper and Van Dam, F., ‘Always expect the unexpected: legal and social aspects of reporting biobank research results to individual research participants’ (Nijmegen: Radboud University Centre for Society and Genomics, 2009)Google Scholar

Bowden, P., Caring: Gender-Sensitive Ethics (London: Routledge, 1997)Google Scholar

Boyle, James, Shamans, Software and Spleens: Law and the Construction of the Information Society (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1996)Google Scholar

Boyle, James, ‘The second enclosure movement and the construction of the public domain’ (2003) 66 Law and Contemporary Problems 33–74Google Scholar

Brace, Laura, The Politics of Property: Labour, Freedom and Belonging (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2004)Google Scholar

Braverman, Andrea M., ‘Exploring ovum donors’ motivations and needs’ (2001) 1(4) American Journal of Bioethics 16–17Google Scholar

Brazier, Margaret, ‘Embryos, property or people’ (1996) 8 Contemporary Reviews in Obstetrics and Gynaecology 50Google Scholar

Brazier, Margaret, ‘Can you buy children?’ (1999) 11 Child and Family Law Quarterly 345–54Google Scholar

Brenkert, George, ‘Self-ownership, freedom and autonomy’ (1998) 2 Journal of Ethics 27–55Google Scholar

Brown, Nik, ‘Contradictions of value – between use and exchange in the cord blood bioeconomy’ (2013) 35 Sociology of Health and Illness 97–112Google Scholar

Brown, Nik, Machin, Laura and McLeod, Danae, ‘The immunitary bioeconomy: the economisation of life in the international cord blood market’ (2011) 30 Social Science and Medicine 1–8Google Scholar

Brownsword, Roger, ‘Biobank governance: property, privacy and consent’ in Lenk, Christian, Hoppe, Nils and Andorno, Roberto (eds), Ethics and Law of Intellectual Property: Current Problems in Politics, Science and Technology (Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 2006), Chapter 5Google Scholar

Brownsword, Roger, ‘Regulating biobanks: another triple bottom line’ in Pascuzzi, Giovanni, Izzo, Umberto and Macilotti, Matteo (eds), Comparative Issues in the Governance of Research Biobanks: Property, Privacy, Intellectual Property and the Role of Technology (New York: Springer, 2013), pp. 41–62Google Scholar

Brownsword, Roger, ‘Human dignity from a legal perspective’, in Düwell, Marcus, Braarvig, Jens, Brownsword, Roger and Mieth, Dietmar (eds), The Cambridge Handbook of Human Dignity: Interdisciplinary Perspectives (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014)Google Scholar

Brownsword, Roger, ‘Big biobanks: three major governance challenges and some mini-constitutional solutions,’ in Stretch, Daniel and Mertz, Marcel (eds), Ethics in Clinical and Translational Research – From Theory to Practice, from Practice to Theory (New York: Springer, 2016)Google Scholar

Burgio, G. R., Gluckman, Eliane and Locatelli, Franco, ‘Ethical reappraisal of 15 years of cord-blood transplantation’ (2003) 361 Lancet 250–52Google Scholar

Burgstaller, J. P., Johnston, G., Jones, N. S. et al., ‘MtDNA segregation in heteroplasmic tissues is common in vivo and modulated by haplotype differences and developmental stage’ (2014) 7(6) Cell Reports 2031Google Scholar

Busby, Helen, ‘The meanings of consent to the donation of cord blood stem cells: perspectives from an interview-based study of a public cord blood bank in England’ (2010) 5(1) Clinical Ethics 22–27Google Scholar

Calabresi, G. and Melamed, A. D., ‘Property rules, liability rules and inalienability: one view of the cathedral’ (1972) 85 Harvard Law Review 1089–128Google Scholar

Calderon-Margalit, R., Friedlander, Y., Yanetz, R. et al., ‘Cancer risk after exposure to treatments for ovulation induction’ (2009) 169 American Journal of Epidemiology 365–73Google Scholar

Callahan, Daniel, ‘Bioethics: private choice and public good’ (1994) 24 Hastings Center Report 28–31Google Scholar

Callahan, Daniel, ‘Individual good and common good: a communitarian approach to bioethics’ (2003) 46 Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 496–507Google Scholar

Canadian Biotechnology Advisory Committee, Patenting of Higher Life Forms and Related Issues: Report to the Government of Canada Biotechnology Ministerial Coordinating Committee (Ottawa: Canadian Biotechnology Advisory Committee, 2002)Google Scholar

Canadian Royal Commission on New Reproductive Technologies, Proceed with Care: Final Report of the Commission on New Reproductive Technologies (Ottawa: Minister of Government Services Canada, 1993)Google Scholar

Capps, Benjamin, ‘Models of biobanks and implications for public health innovation’ (2015) 33 Monash Bioethics Review 238–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Centers for Disease Control and US Department of Health and Human Services, ‘2010 assisted reproductive technology’, National Summary Report (2012) 1–75Google Scholar

Chadwick, Ruth, ‘The Icelandic data base: do modern times need modern sagas?’ (1999) 319 British Medical Journal 441–44Google Scholar

Chadwick, Ruth, ‘Are genes us? Gene therapy and personal identity’ in Becker, G. K., The Moral Status of Persons (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2000), pp. 183–94Google Scholar

Chadwick, Ruth and Wilson, Sarah, ‘Genomic databases as global public goods?’ (2004) 10 Res Publica 123–34Google Scholar

Charo, R. Alta, ‘Body of research – ownership and use of human tissue’ (2006) 355 New England Journal of Medicine 1517–19Google Scholar

Cherry, Mark, Kidney for Sale by Owner: Human Organs, Transplantation and the Market (Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 2005)Google Scholar

Choudhury, Supama, Fishman, Jennifer R., McGowan, Michelle L. and Juengst, Erich T., ‘Big data, open science and the brain: lessons learned from genomics’ (2014) 8 Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 239Google Scholar

Christman, John, The Myth of Property: Toward an Egalitarian Theory of Ownership (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994)Google Scholar

Chrysler, Denise, McGee, Harry, Bach, Janice et al., ‘The Michigan BioTrust for Health: using dried blood samples for research to benefit the community while respecting the individual’ (2011) 39 Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 98–101Google Scholar

Cohen, Cynthia, ‘Selling bits and pieces of humans to make babies: the Gift of the Magi revisited’ (1999) 24 Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 288–306Google Scholar

Cohen, G. A., Self-Ownership, Freedom and Equality (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995)Google Scholar

Comité Consultatif National d’Éthique (CCNE), Opinion Number 21: That the Human Body Should Not Be Used for Commercial Purposes (Paris: CCNE, 1990)Google Scholar

Comité Consultatif National d’Éthique (CCNE), Opinion Number 37: That the Human Genome Should Not Be Used for Commercial Purposes (Paris: CCNE, 1991)Google Scholar

Comité Consultatif National d’Éthique (CCNE), Opinion Number 64: L'avant-projet de loi portant transposition, dans le code de la propriété intellectuelle de la directive 98/44/CR du Parlement Européen et du Conseil en date du 6 juillet 1998, relative à la protection juridique des inventions biotechnologiques (Paris: CCNE, 2000)Google Scholar

Comité Consultatif National d’Éthique (CCNE), Opinion Number 74: Umbilical Cord Blood Banks for Autologous Use or for Research (Paris: CCNE, 2002)Google Scholar

Comité Consultatif National d’Éthique (CCNE), Opinion Number 117: Utilisation des cellules souches issues du sang de cordon, du cordon lui-même et du placenta et leur conservation en biobanques (Paris: CCNE, 2012)Google Scholar

Comité Consultatif National d’Éthique (CCNE) and Nationaler Ethikrat (German National Ethics Council), Opinion No. 77: Ethical Problems Raised by the Collected Biological Material and Associated Information Data: ‘Biobanks’, ‘Biolibraries’ (Paris: CCNE, 2003)Google Scholar

Commission on Intellectual Property Rights, Integrating Intellectual Property Rights and Development Policy (London: Department for International Development, 2002)Google Scholar

Connolly, William E., Political Theory and Modernity (Oxford: Blackwell, 1988)Google Scholar

Cook, Ann Freeman and Hoas, Helena, ‘Trading places: what the research participant can tell the investigator about informed consent’ (2011) 2 Journal of Clinical Research Bioethics 121Google Scholar

Cook, Michael, ‘“Mitochondrial transfer” is a misnomer,’ Bioedge, 22 March 2014Google Scholar

Cooper, Melinda, ‘The living and the dead: variations on De Anima’ (2002) 7 Angelaki: Journal of the Theoretical Humanities 81–104Google Scholar

Cooper, Melinda, Life as Surplus: Biotechnology and Capitalism in the Neoliberal Era (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2008)Google Scholar

Cooper, Melinda, and Waldby, Catherine, Clinical Labor: Tissue Donors and Research Subjects in the Global Bioeconomy (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2014)Google Scholar

Council for Responsible Genetics, Surrogacy in America (Cambridge, MA: Council for Responsible Genetics, 2010)Google Scholar

Crignon-de Oliveira, Claire and Gaille-Nikodimov, Marie, À qui appartient le corps humain? Médecine, politique et droit (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 2004)Google Scholar

Critchley, Christine R., Nichol, Dianne, Otlowski, Margaret F. A. et al., ‘Predicting intention to biobank: a national survey’ (2012) 22 European Journal of Public Health 139–44Google Scholar

Cyranoski, David, ‘Korean's stem-cell stars dogged by suspicion of ethical breach’ (2004) 429 Nature 3Google Scholar

Dagan, Hanoch and Heller, M. A., ‘The liberal commons’, in Dagan, Hanoch, Property: Values and Institutions (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011), Chapter 8Google Scholar

Daly, Herman and Cobb, John, Jr., For the Common Good: Redirecting the Economy toward Community, the Environment, and a Sustainable Future (Boston: Beacon Press, 1989)Google Scholar

Danish Council on Ethics, Patenting Human Genes (Copenhagen: Danish Council on Ethics, 1994)Google Scholar

Davey, Sue, Armitage, Sue, Rocha, Vanderson et al., ‘The London Cord Blood Bank: analysis of banking and transplantation outcome’ (2004) 125(3) British Journal of Haematology 358–65Google Scholar

Davidson, Julia O'Connell, Prostitution, Power and Freedom (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1999)Google Scholar

Dawson, A. C., ‘The intellectual commons: a rationale for regulation’ (1998) 16(3) Prometheus 275–89Google Scholar

De Beauvoir, Simone, Le deuxième sexe (Paris: Gallimard, 1986)Google Scholar

Delavigne, A. and Rozenberg, S., ‘Epidemiology and prevention of ovarian hyper-stimulation syndrome (OHSS): a review’ (2002) 8 Human Reproduction Update 559–77Google Scholar

Delphy, Christine, Close to Home: A Materialist Analysis of Women's Oppression, trans. and ed. Leonard, D. (London: Hutchinson, in association with the Explorations in Feminism Collective, 1984)Google Scholar

De Pinha, J. C. and Gibbons, W. E., ‘Medical implications of oocyte donation’, in Goldfarb, James M. (ed.), Third-Party Reproduction: A Comprehensive Guide (New York: Springer, 2014), pp. 3–30Google Scholar

Devine, Karen, ‘Risky business? The risks and benefits of umbilical cord blood collection’ (2010) 18 Medical Law Review 330–62Google Scholar

Devine, Karen, ‘Ethics and choice in healthcare: the case of public v. private cord blood banking’, in Priaulx, Nicky and Wrigley, Anthony (eds), Ethics, Law and Society (Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 2013), pp. 55–68Google Scholar

Dewes, T. K., Hudson, M. and Southey, K., Te Mata Ira: Cultural Constructions and Biobanking (Auckland, New Zealand: Nga Pae o te Maramatanga, 2014)Google Scholar

Dickenson, Donna L., Moral Luck in Medical Ethics and Practical Politics (Aldershot, UK: Avebury, 1991)Google Scholar

Dickenson, Donna L., Property, Women and Politics (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1997)Google Scholar

Dickenson, Donna L., ‘Procuring gametes for research and therapy: the case for unisex altruism’ (1997) 23 Journal of Medical Ethics 93–95Google Scholar

Dickenson, Donna L., ‘Property and women's alienation from their own reproductive labour’ (2001) 15(3) Bioethics 203–17Google Scholar

Dickenson, Donna L., ‘Commodification of human tissue: implications for feminist and development ethics’ (2002) 2(1) Developing World Bioethics 55–63Google Scholar

Dickenson, Donna L., Risk and Luck in Medical Ethics (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2003)Google Scholar

Dickenson, Donna L., ‘Genetic research and the economic paradigm’ [Einwilligung, Kommodifizierung und Vortelsausgleich in der Genforschung] in Honnefelder, L. et al. (eds), Das Genetische Wissen und die Zukunft des Menschen (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2003), pp. 139–51Google Scholar

Dickenson, Donna L., ‘The threatened trade in human ova’ (2004) 5(2) Nature Reviews Genetics 167Google Scholar

Dickenson, Donna L., ‘Patently paradoxical? Public order and genetic patents’ (2004) 5 Nature Reviews Genetics 86Google Scholar

Dickenson, Donna L., ‘Human tissue and global ethics’ (2005) 1(1) Genomics, Society and Policy 41–53Google Scholar

Dickenson, Donna L., ‘The lady vanishes: what's missing from the stem cell debate’ (2006) 3 Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 43–54Google Scholar

Dickenson, Donna L., ‘Ownership, property and women's bodies’, in Widdows, Heather, Idiakez, Itziar Alkorta and Cirion, Aitziber Emaldi (eds), Women's Reproductive Rights (Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006), pp. 188–98Google Scholar

Dickenson, Donna L., ‘Philosophical assumptions and presumptions about trafficking for prostitution’, in van den Anker, Christien and Doemernik, Jeroen (eds), Trafficking and Women's Rights (Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006), pp. 43–53Google Scholar

Dickenson, Donna L., ‘An uneasy case against Stephen Munzer: umbilical cord blood and property in the body’ (2009) 8(2) American Philosophical Association Newsletter 11–16Google Scholar

Dickenson, Donna L., Body Shopping: Converting Body Parts to Profit (Oxford: Oneworld, 2009)Google Scholar

Dickenson, Donna L., Bioethics: All That Matters (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 2012)Google Scholar

Dickenson, Donna L., Me Medicine vs. We Medicine: Reclaiming Biotechnology for the Common Good (New York: Columbia University Press, 2013)Google Scholar

Dickenson, Donna L., ‘Exploitation and choice in the global egg trade: emotive terminology or necessary critique?’ in Goodwin, Michele (ed.), The Global Body Market: Altruism's Limits (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2013), pp. 21–43Google Scholar

Dickenson, Donna L., ‘The commercialization of human eggs in mitochondrial replacement research’ (2013) 19(1) The New Bioethics 18–29Google Scholar

Dickenson, Donna L., ‘Alternatives to a corporate commons: biobanking, genetics and property in the body,’ in Goold, Imogen, Greasley, Kate, Herring, Jonathan and Skene, Loane (eds), Persons, Parts and Property: How Should We Regulate Human Tissue in the 21st Century? (Oxford: Hart, 2014), pp. 177–96Google Scholar

Dickenson, Donna L., ‘The end of cross-border surrogacy?’ (2016) Project Syndicate, 25 February, www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/crackdown-on-international-surrogacy-trade-by-donna-dickenson-2016-02, accessed 26 July 2016Google Scholar

Dickenson, Donna L., ‘The common good’, in Brownsword, Roger, Scotford, Eloise and Yeung, Karen (eds), The Oxford Handbook on Law and Regulation of Technology (Oxford: Oxford University Press, in press)Google Scholar

Dickenson, Donna and Hakim, Nadey, ‘Ethical issues in limb allotransplants’ (1999) 75 Postgraduate Medical Journal 513–15Google Scholar

Dickenson, Donna and Widdershoven, Guy, ‘Ethical issues in limb transplants’ (2001) 15(2) Bioethics 115–24Google Scholar

Dienst, Paul van and Savulescu, Julian, ‘For and against: no consent should be needed for using leftover body material for scientific purposes’ (2002) 325 British Medical Journal 648–51Google Scholar

Dodds, Susan, ‘Women, commodification and embryonic stem cell research’ in Humber, James and Almeder, Robert F. (eds), Biomedical Ethics Reviews: Stem Cell Research (Totowa, NJ: Humana Press, 2003), pp. 149–75Google Scholar

Downey, Candace L. and Bewley, Susan, ‘Third stage practices and the neonate’ (2009) 20(3) Fetal and Maternal Medicine Review 11–18Google Scholar

Dunn, John, ‘Consent in the political theory of John Locke’ in Dunn, J., Political Obligation in Its Historical Context (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1980)Google Scholar

Dyer, Clare, ‘Patient is to appeal High Court ruling on breast cancer drug’ (2006) 332 British Medical Journal 443Google Scholar

Ébelpoin, Sylvie, ‘Gestation pour altrui: une asssistance médicale à la procréation comme les autres?’ (2011) 87 Information psychiatrique 573–79Google Scholar

Ecker, Jeffrey L. and Greene, Michael F., ‘The case against private umbilical cord blood banking’ (2005) 105(6) Obstetrics and Gynecology 1282–84Google Scholar

Ecologist, , The, Whose Common Future? Reclaiming the Commons (Philadelphia: New Society, 1998)Google Scholar

Ediezen, Leroy C., ‘NHS maternity units should not encourage commercial banking of umbilical cord blood’ (2006) 333 British Medical Journal 801–4Google Scholar

Eisenberg, Rebecca S., ‘How can you patent genes?’ (2002) 2 American Journal of Bioethics 3–11Google Scholar

Ekman, Kajsa Ekis, Being and Being Bought: Prostitution, Surrogacy and the Split Self, trans. Cheadle, Suzanne Martin (North Melbourne: Spinifex Press, 2013)Google Scholar

Elliott, Carl, White Coat, Black Hat: Adventures on the Dark Side of Medicine (Boston: Beacon Press, 2010)Google Scholar

Elshtain, Jean Bethke, Public Man, Private Woman: Women in Social and Political Thought (Oxford: Martin Robertson, 1984)Google Scholar

Ende, Norman, ‘Letter’ (1995) 86(12) Blood 4699Google Scholar

Engels, Friedrich, The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State (New York: International, 1972)Google Scholar

English, Veronica, Mussell, Rebecca, Sheather, Julian and Sommerville, Ann, ‘Ethics briefings: retention and use of human tissue’ (2004) 30 Journal of Medical Ethics 235–36Google Scholar

Epstein, Richard A., ‘Surrogacy: the case for full contractual enforcement’ (1995) 8 Virginia Law Review 2305–41Google Scholar

Ertman, Martha, ‘The upside of baby markets’, in Goodwin, Michele Bratcher (ed.), Baby Markets: Money and the New Politics of Creating Families (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010), pp. 23–40Google Scholar

Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM), ‘Financial incentives in recruitment of oocyte donors’ (2004) 82 Fertility and Sterility supplement S240–42Google Scholar

Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM), ‘Financial compensation of oocyte donors’ (2007) 88(2) Fertility and Sterility 305–9Google Scholar

European Group on Ethics and New Technologies (EGE), Opinion on the Ethical Aspects of Umbilical Cord Blood Banking, Opinion Number 19, IP/04/364 (Brussels: EGE, 2004)Google Scholar

Fabre, Cecile, Whose Body Is It Anyway? Justice and the Integrity of the Person (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2006)Google Scholar

Fabre-Mangan, Muriel, La gestation pour autrui: Fictions et realités (Paris: Fayard, 2013)Google Scholar

Fagot-Largeault, Anne, ‘Ownership of the human body: judicial and legislative responses in France’ in Have, Henk ten and Welie, Jos (eds), Ownership of the Human Body: Philosophical Considerations on the Use of the Human Body and Its Parts in Healthcare (Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1998), pp. 115–40Google Scholar

Feldman, Laura, ‘Utilising property concepts to respond to new risks and challenges posed by medical research’ (2010) paper given at the HeLex centre, University of Oxford, 23 JuneGoogle Scholar

Fenton-Glynn, Claire, ‘The regulation and recognition of surrogacy under English law: an overview of the case-law’ (2015) 27(1) Child and Family Law Quarterly 83–95Google Scholar

Ferguson, Ann, Sexual Democracy: Women, Oppression and Revolution (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1991)Google Scholar

Ferguson, Kathy E., The Man Question: Visions of Subjectivity in Feminist Theory (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993)Google Scholar

Fernandez, M. N., Regidor, C. and Cabrera, R., ‘Letter: Umbilical cord blood transplantation in adults’ (2005) 352 New England Journal of Medicine 935Google Scholar

Fisk, Nicholas M. and Atun, Rifat, ‘Public-private partnership in cord blood banking’ (2008) 336 British Medical Journal 642–44Google Scholar

Fisk, N. M., Roberts, I. A. G., Markwald, R. and Mironov, V. et al., ‘Can routine commercial cord blood banking be scientifically and ethically justified?’ (2005) 2 PLOS Medicine 2Google Scholar

Flegel, Ken, ‘Editorial: Ten reasons to make cord blood stem cells a public good’ (2009) 180 Canadian Medical Association Journal 1279Google Scholar

Fowler, J. H., and Dawes, C. T., ‘Two genes predict voter turnout’ (2007) 70 Journal of Politics 579–94Google Scholar

Fraser, Antonia, The Weaker Vessel: Women's Lot in Seventeenth-Century England (London: Mandarin, 1989)Google Scholar

Fraser, Nancy, Unruly Practices: Power, Discourse and Gender in Contemporary Social Theory (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1989)Google Scholar

Freeman, Michael, ‘Does surrogacy have a future after Brazier?’ (1999) 7 Medical Law Review 1–20Google Scholar

Frow, John, ‘Gift and commodity’ in Frow, J., Time and Commodity Culture: Essays in Cultural Theory and Postmodernity (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997)Google Scholar

Gardiner, Becky, ‘The kindness of strangers’ (2015) The Guardian, 21 NovemberGoogle Scholar

Gatens, Moira, Feminism and Philosophy: Perspectives on Difference and Equality (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1991)Google Scholar

Gerrand, Nicole, ‘The misuse of Kant in the debate about a market in human body parts’ (1999) 16(1) Journal of Applied Philosophy 59–67Google Scholar

Giudice, L., Santa, E. and Pool, R. (eds), Assessing the Medical Risks of Human Oocyte Donation for Stem Cell Research: Workshop Report (Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine and National Research Council, National Academies Press, 2007)Google Scholar

Gluckman, E., Broxmeyer, H. A., Auerbach, A. D. et al., ‘Hematopoietic reconstitution in a patient with Fanconi's anemia by means of umbilical-cord blood from an HLA-identical sibling’ (1989) 321 New England Journal of Medicine 1174–78Google Scholar

Godard, Beatrice, Marshall, Jennifer and Laberge, Claude, ‘Community engagement in genetic research: Results of the first public consultation for the Quebec CARTaGENE project’ (2007) 10 Community Genetics 147–58Google Scholar

Gold, E. Richard and Cho, Mildred K., ‘Patenting human genetic material: refocusing the debate’ (2000) 1 Nature Reviews Genetics 227–31Google Scholar

Goldacre, Ben, Bad Pharma: How Drug Companies Mislead Doctors and Harm Patients (London: Fourth Estate, 2012)Google Scholar

Goodwin, Michele, Black Markets: The Supply and Demand of Body Parts (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006)Google Scholar

Goold, Imogen and Quigley, Muireann, ‘The case for a property approach’, in Goold, Imogen, Greasley, Kate, Herring, Jonathan and Skene, Loane (eds), Persons, Parts and Property: How Should We Regulate Human Tissue in the 21st Century? (Oxford: Hart, 2014), pp. 231–62Google Scholar

Gottlieb, Karen, ‘Human biological samples and the law of property: the trust as a model for biological repositories’, in Weir, R. F. (ed.), Stored Tissue Samples: Ethical, Legal and Public Policy Implications (Iowa City: Iowa University Press, 1998), pp. 183–97Google Scholar

Gottweis, Herbert, and Prainsack, Barbara, ‘Emotion in political discourse: approaches to stem cell governance in the USA, UK, Israel and Germany’ (2006) 6 Reproductive Medicine 823–29Google Scholar

Graff, G. D., Phillips, D., Lei, Z. et al., ‘Not quite a myriad of gene patents’ (2013) 31(5) Nature Biotechnology 404–10Google Scholar

Greeley, Henry T., ‘Moving human embryonic stem cells from legislature to lab: remaining legal and ethical questions’ (2006) 3(5) PLOS Medicine, 28 FebruaryGoogle Scholar

Grey, Thomas, ‘The disintegration of property’ in Pennock, J. P. and Chapman, J. (eds), Nomos XXII: Property (New York: New York University Press, 1980), pp. 69–85Google Scholar

Grubb, Andrew, ‘“I, me mine”: bodies, parts and property’ (1998) 3 Medical Law International 299–313Google Scholar

Guardian, The, ‘Mexican state votes to ban surrogacy for gay men and foreign people’ (2015) 15 DecemberGoogle Scholar

Gunn, Neil M., Butcher's Broom (Edinburgh: Polygon, 2006)Google Scholar

Gupta, Jyotsna, ‘Postmodern bodies, assisted reproduction and women's agency’, paper presented at the Seventh World International Association of Bioethics conference, Sydney, November 2004Google Scholar

Gupta, Jyotsna, ‘Exploring appropriation of “surplus” ova and embryos in Indian IVF clinics’ (2011) 30(2) New Genetics and Society 167–80Google Scholar

Gupta, Jyotsna and Richters, Annemiek, ‘Embodied subjects and fragmented objects: women's bodies, assisted reproduction technologies and the right to self-determination’ (2008) 5 Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 239–49Google Scholar

Gurmankin, Andrea D., ‘Risk information provided to prospective oocyte donors in a preliminary phone call’ (2001) 1(4) American Journal of Bioethics 3–13Google Scholar

Habermas, Juergen, Between Facts and Norms: A Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy, trans. Rehg, William (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1996)Google Scholar

Haddow, Gill, Laurie, Graeme, Cunningham-Burley, Sarah and Hunter, Kathryn, ‘Tackling community concerns about commercialisation and genetic research’ (2007) 64 Social Science and Medicine 272–82Google Scholar

Haddow, Gill, Cunningham-Burley, Sarah and Murray, Lorraine, ‘Can the governance of a population genetic databank affect recruitment? Evidence from the public consultation of Generation Scotland’ (2011) 20 Public Understanding of Science 117–29Google Scholar

Haley, Rebecca, Horvath, Liana and Sugarman, Jeremy, ‘Ethical issues in cord blood banking: summary of a workshop’ (1997) 38 Transfusion 367–73Google Scholar

Hanson, Mark M., ‘Religious voices in biotechnology: the case of gene patenting’ (1997) 27 Hastings Center Report 1–30Google Scholar

Haraway, Donna J., Simians, Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature (New York: Routledge, 1991)Google Scholar

Haraway, Donna J., ‘Situated knowledges: the science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective’ (1988) 14(3) Feminist Studies 575–99Google Scholar

Hardin, Garrett, ‘The tragedy of the commons’ (1968) 162 Science 1243–48Google Scholar

Harding, Sandra, ‘Is gender a variable in conceptions of rationality? A survey of issues’, in Gould, Carol C. (ed.), Beyond Domination: New Perspectives on Feminism and Philosophy (Totowa, NJ: Rowman and Allanheld, 1984), pp. 43–63Google Scholar

Harmon, S. H. E. and Laurie, Graeme, ‘Yearworth v. North Bristol NHS Trust: property, principles and paradigms’ (2010) 69 Cambridge Law Journal 476–93Google Scholar

Harris, A., Wyatt, S. and Kelly, S., ‘The gift of spit (and the obligation to return it): how consumers of online genetic testing services participate in research’ (2012) 16 Information, Communication and Society 236–57Google Scholar

Harris, James W., Property and Justice (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996)Google Scholar

Harris, John, Wonderwoman and Superman: The Ethics of Human Biotechnology (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992)Google Scholar

Harrison, Charlotte H., ‘Neither Moore nor the market’ (2002) 28 American Journal of Law and Medicine 77–104Google Scholar

Hasday, J. F., ‘The canon of family law’ (2004) 57 Stanford Law Review 825Google Scholar

Healy, David, Pharmageddon (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2013)Google Scholar

Healy, Kieran, Last Best Gifts: Altruism and the Market for Human Blood and Organs (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2006)Google Scholar

Hegel, G. W. F., Philosophy of Right, trans. Knox, T. M. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1967)Google Scholar

Held, David, Models of Democracy (1st edn, Cambridge: Polity Press, 1987)Google Scholar

Held, Virginia, Feminist Morality (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993)Google Scholar

Heller, Michael A., ‘The tragedy of the anticommons: property in the transition from Marx to markets’ (1998) 111 Harvard Law Review 621–68Google Scholar

Heller, M. and Eisenberg, R., ‘Can patents deter biomedical research?’ (1998) 280 Science 698–701Google Scholar

Henare, M., ‘Tikanga hau: the spirit of the gift’ (2007), presentation at Philanthropy New Zealand Seminar, Auckland, New Zealand, 28 March, www.philanthropy.org.nz/files/Manuka&20Henare.ppt, accessed 1 June 2016Google Scholar

Herring, Jonathan, ‘Why we need a statute regime to regulate bodily material,’ in Goold, Imogen, Greasley, Kate, Herring, Jonathan and Skene, Loane (eds), Persons, Parts and Property: How Should We Regulate Human Tissue in the 21st Century? (Oxford: Hart, 2014), pp. 215–30Google Scholar

Hiatt, Howard, ‘Protecting the medical commons: who is responsible?’ (1975) 293 New England Journal of Medicine 235–41Google Scholar

Hohfeld, Wesley Newcomb, Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in Judicial Reasoning (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1919)Google Scholar

Holland, Suzanne, ‘Contested commodities at both ends of life: buying and selling embryos, gametes and body tissues’ (2001) 11 Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 263–84Google Scholar

Honoré, A. M., ‘Ownership’, in Making Law Bind: Essays Legal and Philosophical (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987), pp. 161–92Google Scholar

Horsey, Kirstey, et al., Surrogacy in the UK: Myth Busting and Reform (2015) Report of the UK Working Group on Surrogacy and Law Reform, www.kent.ac.uk/law/research/projects/current/surrogacy/Surrogacy&20in&20the&20UK&20Report&20FINAL.pdf, accessed 1 May 2016Google Scholar

Hottois, Gilbert, Essais philosophie bioéthique et biopolitique (Paris: Librairie Philosophique J. Vrin, 1999)Google Scholar

Howard, Heidi C., Sterckx, Sigrid, Cockbain, Julian et al., ‘The convergence of direct-to-consumer genetic testing companies and biobanking activity: the example of 23andMe,’ in Weinroth, Matthias and Rodrigues, Eugenia (eds), Knowing New Biotechnology: Social Aspects of Technological Convergence (London, Routledge, 2015), pp. 59–75Google Scholar

Hudson, M., Milne, M., Reynolds, P. et al., Te Ara Tika: Guidelines for Maori Research Ethics (Auckland, New Zealand, Health Research Council of New Zealand, 2010)Google Scholar

Hudson, Maui, Russell, Khyla, Uerata, Lynley et al., ‘Te Mata Ira – faces of the gene: developing a cultural foundation for biobanking and genomic research involving Maori’ (2016) 12(4) AlterNative: An International Journal of Indigenous Peoples 341–55.Google Scholar

HUGO (Human Genome Organization), Summary of Principles Agreed at the International Strategy Meeting on Human Genome Sequencing (Bermuda Statement) (London: Wellcome Trust, 1996)Google Scholar

Huijer, Marli and Horstman, Klasien, Factor XX: Vrouwen, Eicellen en Genen [Factor XX: Women, Egg Cells and Genes] (Amsterdam: Boom, 2004).Google Scholar

Fertilisation, Human and Authority, Embryology (HFEA), ‘HFEA publishes report on third scientific review into the safety and efficacy of mitochondrial replacement techniques’ (2014) www.hfea.gov.uk/8964.html, accessed 15 July 2015Google Scholar

Humbyrd, Casey, ‘Fair trade international surrogacy’ (2009) 9 Developing World Bioethics 111–19Google Scholar

Hutchon, David, ‘Commercial cord blood banking – immediate clamping is not safe’ (2006) 333 British Medical Journal 919Google Scholar

Ikemoto, Lisa, ‘Eggs as capital: human egg procurement in the fertility industry and the stem cell research enterprise’ (2009) 34 Signs 763–81Google Scholar

Ingram, Tup, ‘Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc.: the product of nature doctrine revisited’ (2014) 29 Berkeley Technology Law Journal 385Google Scholar

Ipsos-MORI, The One-Way Mirror: Public Attitudes to Commercial Access to Health Data (London: Wellcome Trust, 2016)Google Scholar

Jackson, Emily, ‘Fraudulent stem cell research and respect for the embryo’ (2006) 1 Biosciences 349–56Google Scholar

Jacobs, Allen, Dwyer, James and Lee, Peter, ‘Seventy ova’ (2001) 31 Hastings Center Report 12–14Google Scholar

Jaggar, Alison, Feminist Politics and Human Nature (Totowa, NJ: Rowman and Allanheld, 1983)Google Scholar

Jensen, K. and Murray, F., ‘International patenting: the landscape of the human genome’ (2005) 310 Science 239–40Google Scholar

Johnson, Sandra H., ‘A buyer's market: fixing the price for human ova for assisted reproduction’ (2015) 45 Hastings Center Report 9–10Google Scholar

Johnston, Carolyn, and Kaye, Jane, ‘Does the UK Biobank have a legal obligation to feedback individual findings to participants?’ (2004) 12 Medical Law Review 239–67Google Scholar

Joly, Yann, ‘Open source approaches to biotechnology: utopia revisited’ (2007) 59(2) Maine Law Review 386Google Scholar

Jones, David Albert, ‘The other woman: evaluating the language of “three parent” embryos’ (2015) 10 Clinical Ethics 97–106Google Scholar

Jonsson, Kutte, Der Förbjudna Mödraskapet (Malmo, Sweden: Bokbox, 2003)Google Scholar

Kaimal, Anjali, Smith, Catherine, Laros, Russell K., Jr. et al., ‘Cost-effectiveness of private umbilical cord blood banking’ (2009) 114(4) Obstetrics and Gynecology 848–55Google Scholar

Kaiser, Jocelyn, ‘Court decides tissue samples belong to university, not patients’ (2006) 312 Science 436Google Scholar

Kant, Immanuel, Lectures on Ethics (Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill, 1963)Google Scholar

Kattel, Rainer and Riivo, Anton, ‘The Estonian genome project and economic development’ (2004) 8(1–2) Trames: Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences 106–28Google Scholar

Kaye, Jane, Helgason, Hordur Helgi, Nomper, Ants et al., ‘Population genetic databases: a comparative analysis of the law in Iceland, Sweden, Estonia and the UK’ (2004) 8(1–2) Trames: Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences 15–33Google Scholar

Kaye, Jane, Whitley, Edgar A., Kanellopoulou, Nadja et al., ‘Dynamic consent: a solution to a perennial problem?’ (2011) 343 British Medical Journal 1756–833Google Scholar

Kaye, Jane, Whitley, E. A., Lund, D. et al., ‘Dynamic consent: a patient interface for 21st-century research networks?’ (2014) 23 European Journal of Human Genetics 141–46Google Scholar

Kesselheim, A. S. and Mello, M. M., ‘Gene patenting – is the pendulum swinging back?’ (2010) 362 New England Journal of Medicine 1855–58Google Scholar

Kesselheim, Aaron S., Cook-Deegan, Robert M., Winickoff, David E. et al., ‘Gene patenting – the Supreme Court finally speaks’ (2013) 369 New England Journal of Medicine 869–75Google Scholar

Klein, Naomi, No Logo (London: Picador, 2000)Google Scholar

Knalo, A., et al., ‘Individual differences in allocations of funds in the dictator game associated with length of the arginine vasopressin1a receptor R53 promoter region and correlation between R53 length and hippocampal mRNA’ (2008) 7 Genes, Brain and Behaviour 266–75Google Scholar

Knoppers, Bartha M., ‘DNA banking: a retrospective perspective’ in Burley, J. and Harris, J. (eds), A Companion to Genethics (Oxford: Blackwell, 2002), pp. 379–86Google Scholar

Knoppers, Bartha M., ‘Biobanking: international norms’ (2005) 33 Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 7–14Google Scholar

Knoppers, Bartha M., Hirtle, Marie and Lormeau, Sébastien, ‘Ethical issues in international collaborative research on the human genome: the HGP and the HGDP’ (1996) 34 Genomics 272–82Google Scholar

Knoppers, Bartha M., Hirtle, Marie and Glass, K. C., ‘Commercialization of genetic research and public policy’ (1999) 286(5448) Science 2277–78Google Scholar

Knoppers, Bartha M., Deschênes, Mylene, Ma'n, H. Zawati and Tassé, Anne Marie, ‘Population studies: Return of research results and incidental findings, Policy Statement’ (2013) 21(3) European Journal of Human Genetics 245–47Google Scholar

Koegler, Gesine, Sensken, Sandra, Airey, Judith A. et al., ‘A new human somatic stem cell from placental cord blood with intrinsic pluripotent differentiation potential’ (2004) 200(2) Journal of Experimental Medicine 123–35Google Scholar

Korts, Kuliki, Weldon, Sue and Gudmansdottir, Margaret Lilja, ‘Genetic databases and public attitudes: a comparison of Iceland, Estonia and the UK’ (2004) 8(1–2) Trames: Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences 131–49Google Scholar

Kramer, W., Schneider, J. and Schultz, N., ‘US oocyte donors: a retrospective study of medical and psychosocial issues’ (2009) 24(12) Human Reproduction 3144–49Google Scholar

Lafontaine, Céline, Le corps-marché: La marchandisation de la vie humaine a l’ère de la bioéconomie (Paris: Éditions du Seuil, 2014)Google Scholar

Larrabee, M. J. (ed.), An Ethic of Care (New York: Routledge, 1993)Google Scholar

Laughlin, M. J., Eapen, M., Rubinstein, P. et al., ‘Outcomes after transplantation of cord blood or bone marrow from unrelated donors in adults with leukaemia’ (2004) 351 New England Journal of Medicine 2265–75Google Scholar

Laurie, Graeme, (Intellectual) Property: Let's Think about Staking a Claim to Our Own Genetic Samples (Edinburgh: Arts and Humanities Board Research Centre, 2004)Google Scholar

Lee, J., ‘The fertile imagination of the common law: Yearworth v. North Bristol NHS Trust’ (2009) 17 Torts Law Journal 130Google Scholar

Leigh, Bertie, Umbilical Cord Blood Stem Cell Banking: Legal Review (London: Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists Umbilical Cell Cord Banking Committee, 2005)Google Scholar

Lessing, Lawrence, The Future of Ideas: The Fate of the Commons in a Connected World (New York: Random House, 2001)Google Scholar

Levine, Aaron D., ‘Self-regulation, compensation, and the ethical recruitment of oocyte donors’ (2010) 40(2) Hastings Center Report 25–36Google Scholar

Levitt, Mairi, ‘Forensic databases: benefits and ethical and social costs’ (2007) 83 British Medical Bulletin 235–48Google Scholar

Levitt, Mairi and Weldon, Sue, ‘A well placed trust? Public perceptions of the governance of DNA databases’ (2005) 15(4) Critical Public Health 311–21Google Scholar

Lewis, Celine, Clotworthy, Margaret, Hilton, Shona et al., ‘Consent for the use of human biological samples for biomedical research: a mixed media study exploring the British public's preferences,’ (2013) 3 BMJ Open e003022Google Scholar

Liddell, Kathleen and Wallace, Susan, ‘Emerging regulatory issues for stem cell medicine’ (2005) 1(1) Genomics, Society and Policy 54–73Google Scholar

Lindemann Nelson, H. and Lindemann Nelson, J., The Patient in the Family (London: Routledge, 1995)Google Scholar

Linebaugh, Peter, ‘Enclosures from the bottom up’ (2010) 108 Radical History Review 11–27Google Scholar

Lock, Margaret, Twice Dead: Organ Transplants and the Reinvention of Death (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002)Google Scholar

Locke, John, The Second Treatise on Civil Government (1689), in Penniman, Howard R. (ed.), John Locke: On Politics and Education (New York: D. Van Nostrand, 1947)Google Scholar

Lorentzen, H. and Paterson, F., ‘Le don des vivants: l'altruisme des Norvégiens et des Français?’ in Elster, J. and Herpin, N. (eds), Éthique des choix médicaux (Arles: Actes Sud, 1992), pp. 121–38Google Scholar

Lukes, Steven, Marxism and Morality (Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan, 1993)Google Scholar

Lyons, Barry, ‘“The good that is interred in their bones”: are there property rights in the child?’ (2011) 19 Medical Law Review 372–400Google Scholar

MacPherson, C. B., The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism: Hobbes to Locke (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1962)Google Scholar

Magnus, David, ‘Issues in oocyte donation for stem cell research’ (2006) 308 Science 1747–48Google Scholar

Mahoney, Joan, ‘An essay on surrogacy and feminist thought’ in Gostin, Larry (ed.), Surrogate Motherhood: Politics and Privacy (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1990), pp. 183–97Google Scholar

Maio, Giovanni, ‘The cultural specificity of research ethics – or why ethical debate in France is different’ (2002) 28 Journal of Medical Ethics 147–50Google Scholar

Malone, T., Catalano, P. J., O'Dwyer, P. J. and Giantonio, B., ‘High rate of consent to bank biologic samples for future research: the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group experience’ (2002) 94 Journal of the National Cancer Institute 769–71Google Scholar

Manson, Neil C., ‘How not to think about genetic information’ (2005) 35 Hastings Center Report 3Google Scholar

Markens, Susan, Surrogate Motherhood and the Politics of Reproduction (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2010)Google Scholar

Marx, Karl, Capital, trans. Samuel Moore and Edward Aveling, ed. Engels, Frederick (Moscow: Progress, 1954, original edn 1867)Google Scholar

Marx, Karl, Early Writings, trans. and ed. Bottomore, T. B. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1963)Google Scholar

Marx, Karl, Grundrisse: Foundations of the Critique of Political Economy, trans. Nicolas, Martin (New York: Vintage Books, 1973)Google Scholar

Marzano-Parisoli, Maria M., Penser le corps (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 2002)Google Scholar

Mason, Ken and Laurie, Graeme, ‘Consent or property? Dealing with the body and its parts in the shadow of Bristol and Alder Hey’ (2001) 9 Medical Law Review 710–29Google Scholar

Mason, Ken and Laurie, Graeme, Law and Medical Ethics (8th edn, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011)Google Scholar

Mauss, Marcel, The Gift: The Form and Reason for Exchange in Archaic Societies (2nd edn, London: Routledge, 1990)Google Scholar

McCarraher, Eugene, ‘We have never been disenchanted’ (2015) 17 The Hedgehog Review 86–100Google Scholar

McGovern, Ann, ‘Sharing our body and blood: organ donation and feminist critiques of sacrifice’ (2003) 28(1) Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 89–114Google Scholar

McHale, Jean, ‘Waste, ownership and bodily products’ (2000) 8(2) Health Care Analysis 123–35Google Scholar

McKean, Margaret A., ‘Success on the commons: a comparative examination of institutions for common resource property management’ (1992) 4 Journal of Theoretical Politics 247–81Google Scholar

McKenna, David and Sheth, Jayesh, ‘Umbilical cord blood: current status and promise for the future’ (2011) 134 Indian Journal of Medical Research 261–69Google Scholar

MacKenzie, Catriona, ‘Conceptions of the body and conceptions of autonomy in bioethics’, in Scully, J. L., Baldwin-Ragaven, L. and Fitzpatrick, P. (eds) Feminist Bioethics: At the Center, on the Margins (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2010), pp. 71–90Google Scholar

McLeod, Carolyn, ‘Means and partial means: the full range of the objectification of women’ (2003) 28 Canadian Journal of Philosophy 219–44Google Scholar

McLeod, Carolyn and Baylis, Francoise, ‘For dignity or money: feminists on the commodification of women's reproductive labour,’ in Steinbock, Bonnie (ed.) The Oxford Handbook of Bioethics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), pp. 258–83Google Scholar

McLeod, Carolyn and Baylis, Francoise, ‘Feminists on the inalienability of human embryos’ (2006) 21(1) Hypatia 1–14Google Scholar

Mead, H. M., Tikanga Maori: Living by Maori Values (Wellington, New Zealand: Huia, 2003)Google Scholar

Mead, H. M., Whakapapa and the Human Gene (Wellington, New Zealand: Toi Te Taiao/The Bioethics Council of New Zealand, 2004)Google Scholar

Medical Research Council, Public Perceptions of the Collection of Human Biological Samples (London: MRC, 2000)Google Scholar

Medical Research Council, Human Tissue and Biological Samples for Use in Research: Operational and Ethical Guidelines (London: MRC, 2001)Google Scholar

Meilaender, Gilbert, ‘The point of a ban, or, how to think about stem cell research’ (2001) 31 Hastings Center Report 9–15Google Scholar

Mello, Michelle M. and Wolf, Leslie E., ‘The Havasupai case – lessons for research involving stored tissue samples’ (2010) 363 New England Journal of Medicine 204–7Google Scholar

Memmi, Dominique, Les gardiens du corps: dix ans de magistère bioéthique (Paris: Editions de l’École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales, 1996)Google Scholar

Merle, Jean-Christophe, ‘A Kantian argument for a duty to donate one's own organs: a reply to Nicole Gerrand’ (2000) 17(1) Journal of Applied Philosophy 93–101Google Scholar

Merleau-Ponty, Maurice, The Visible and the Invisible (Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press, 1968)Google Scholar

Ministère Délégué à la Recherche (France), Communiqué de Presse, ‘Cellules souches embryonnaires: présentation du décret autorisant l'importation’, 19 October 2004, www.recherche.gouv.fr/discours/2004/decretembryon.htmGoogle Scholar

Mitchell, Robert, ‘Registered genes, patents and bio-circulation’ (2003) paper presented at the BIOS ‘Vital Politics’ conference, London School of Economics, SeptemberGoogle Scholar

Mitchell, Robert and Waldby, Catherine, ‘National biobanks: clinical labor, risk production, and the creation of biovalue’ (2010) 35 Science, Technology and Human Values 330–55Google Scholar

Moazam, Farhat, Zaman, Riffat Moazam and Jafarey, Aamir M., ‘Conversations with kidney vendors in Pakistan: an ethnographic study’ (2009) 39 Hastings Center Report 29–44Google Scholar

Montgomery, Jonathan, ‘Children as property’ (1988) 51 Medical Law Review 323–42Google Scholar

Montgomery, Jonathan, Health Care Law (1st edn, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997)Google Scholar

Moore, Henrietta L., A Passion for Difference: Essays in Anthropology and Gender (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1994)Google Scholar

Morrison, Michael, Dickenson, Donna and Lee, Sandra Soo-Jin, ‘Translation in healthcare: ethical, legal and social implications’ (2016) BMC Medical Ethics, www.biomedcentral.com/collections/translationelsi, accessed 1 August 2016Google Scholar

Muir, Rebecca, Diot, Alan and Poulton, Joanna, ‘Mitochondrial content is central to nuclear gene expression: profound implications for human health’ (2015) 38 Bioessays 150–56Google Scholar

Munzer, Stephen R., A Theory of Property (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990)Google Scholar

Munzer, Stephen R., ‘An uneasy case against property rights in human body parts’ (1994) 11(2) Social Philosophy and Policy 259–86Google Scholar

Munzer, Stephen R., ‘The special case of property rights in umbilical cord blood for transplantation’ (1999) 51 Rutgers Law Review 493–568Google Scholar

Munzer, Stephen R., (ed.), New Essays in the Legal and Political Theory of Property (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002)Google Scholar

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, Quality Statement 6: Delayed Cord Clamping (2015) www.nice.org.uk/guidance/qs105/chapter/quality-statement-6-delayed-cord-clampingGoogle Scholar

Nedelsky, Jennifer, ‘Property in potential life – a relational approach to choosing legal categories’ (1993) 6 Canadian Journal of Legal Jurisprudence 343–58Google Scholar

Nelkin, Dorothy, Dangerous Diagnostics: The Social Power of Biological Information (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994)Google Scholar

Nelkin, Dorothy, ‘Is bioethics for sale?’ (2003) 24(2) Tocqueville Review 45–60Google Scholar

Nelkin, Dorothy and Lindee, Susan, The DNA Mystique: The Gene as a Cultural Icon (New York: W. H. Freeman, 1995)Google Scholar

Nilstun, Tore and Hermeren, Goran, ‘Human tissue samples and ethics – attitudes of the general public in Sweden to biobank research’ (2006) 9 Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 81–86Google Scholar

Novaes, Simone Bateman, Les passeurs de gamètes (Nancy, France: Presses Universitaires de Nancy, 1994)Google Scholar

Nuffield Council on Bioethics, Stem Cell Therapy: The Ethical Issues, a Discussion Paper (London: Nuffield Council on Bioethics, 2000)Google Scholar

Nuffield Council on Bioethics, The Ethics of Patenting DNA (London: Nuffield Council on Bioethics, 2002)Google Scholar

Nussbaum, Martha, ‘Objectification’ (1995) 24(4) Philosophy and Public Affairs 249–91Google Scholar

Offe, Claus, ‘Whose good is the common good?’ (2012) 38 Philosophy and Social Criticism 665–84Google Scholar

Okin, Susan Moller, Women in Western Political Thought (London: Virago, 1980)Google Scholar

Okoth-Ogendo, H. W. O., ‘The tragic African commons: a century of exploration, suppression and submersion’ (2003) 1 University of Nairobi Law Journal 107–17Google Scholar

Oldham, Paul, ‘The patenting of plant and animal genomes’, paper presented at the seventh workshop of the EC PropEur project, Paris, May 2006Google Scholar

Oliveiro, P., ‘La communication sociale des matériaux biologiques: sang, sperme, organs, cadavres’ (1993) 18 Cahiers internationaux de psychologie sociale 21–51Google Scholar

Ossorio, Pilar, ‘Common heritage arguments against patenting DNA’ in Chapman, A. (ed.), Perspectives on Gene Patenting: Religion, Science and Industry in Dialogue (Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1999), pp. 89–108Google Scholar

Ossorio, Pilar, ‘Legal and ethical issues in biotechnology patenting’ in Burley, J. and Harris, J., A Companion to Genethics (Oxford: Blackwell, 2002), pp. 408–19Google Scholar

Ostrom, Elinor, Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990)Google Scholar

Otten, J., Wyle, H. and Phelps, G., ‘The charitable trust as a model for genomic banks’ (2004) 350 New England Journal of Medicine 85–86Google Scholar

Palsson, Gisli, ‘Spitting image’ (2009) 1 Anthropology Now 12–22Google Scholar

Palsson, Gisli and Rabinow, Paul, ‘Iceland: the case of a national Human Genome Project’ (1999) 15(3) Anthropology Today 14–18Google Scholar

Pande, Amrit, ‘Commercial surrogacy in India: manufacturing a perfect mother-worker’ (2010) 35 Signs 965–92Google Scholar

Pande, Amrit, Wombs in Labor: Transnational Commercial Surrogacy in India (New York: Columbia University Press, 2014)Google Scholar

Parry, Bronwyn, ‘The new Human Tissue Bill: categorization and definitional issues and their implications’ (2005) 1(1) Genomics, Society and Policy 74–85Google Scholar

Parry, Bronwyn, ‘Narratives of neoliberalism: “clinical labour” in context’ (2015) 41 Medical Humanities 32–37Google Scholar

Parry, Bronwyn and Gere, Cathy, ‘Contested bodies: the commodification of human biological artefacts’ (2006) 15 Science as Culture 139–58Google Scholar

Parsons, J., Lukyanenko, R. and Wiersma, Y., ‘Easier citizen science is better’ (2011) 471 Nature 37Google Scholar

Pateman, Carole, The Sexual Contract (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1988)Google Scholar

Pateman, Carole, ‘The fraternal social contract’ in The Disorder of Women (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1989), pp. 33–57Google Scholar

Pateman, Carole, ‘Self-ownership and property in the person: democratization and a tale of two concepts’ (2002) 10 Journal of Political Philosophy 20–53Google Scholar

Pateman, Carole, and Mills, Charles, Contract and Domination (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2007)Google Scholar

Patrick, M., Smith, A. L., Meyer, W. R. and Bashford, A., ‘Anonymous oocyte donation: a follow-up questionnaire’ (2001) 75 Fertility and Sterility 1034–36Google Scholar

Patterson, J., Maori Values (Palmerston North, New Zealand: Dunmore Press, 1992)Google Scholar

Pearlman, Jonathan, ‘Thailand bans surrogate babies from leaving after Baby Gammy controversy’ (2014) The Telegraph, 15 AugustGoogle Scholar

Penner, James, The Idea of Property in Law (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997)Google Scholar

Pennings, Guido, de Mouzon, J., Shenfield, Francoise et al., ‘Socio-demographic and fertility-related characteristics and motivations of oocyte donors in eleven European countries’ (2014) 29 Human Reproduction deu048Google Scholar

Phillips, Anne, ‘It's my body and I'll do what I like with it: bodies as objects’ (2011) 39(6) Political Theory 724–48Google Scholar

Posey, D., and Dutfield, G., Beyond Intellectual Property: Towards Traditional Resource Rights for Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (Ottawa: International Development Research Centre, 1996)Google Scholar

Posner, Richard A., Economic Analysis of Law (4th edn, Boston: Little, Brown, 1992)Google Scholar

Po-Wah, Julia Tao-Li, ‘Right-making and wrong-making in surrogate motherhood; a Confucian feminist perspective,’ in Tong, Rosemarie, Donchin, Anne and Dodds, Susan (eds), Linking Visions: Feminist Bioethics, Human Rights and the Developing World (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2004), pp. 183–202Google Scholar

Prainsack, Barbara, ‘How to avoid selling out: public attitudes to commercial access to health data’ (2016), Bionews, 26 AprilGoogle Scholar

Prasad, V. K., Mendizabal, A., Parikh, S. H. et al., ‘Unrelated donor umbilical cord blood transplantation in inherited metabolic disorders in 159 patients from a single center’ (2008) 112 Blood 2979–89Google Scholar

Prendiville, W. J. and Elbourne, D., ‘Care during the third stage of labour’ in Chalmers, I., Enkin, M. and Keirse, M. J. N. C. (eds), Effective Care in Pregnancy and Childbirth (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989), pp. 1145–69Google Scholar

Prendiville, W. J., Elbourne, D. and McDonald, S., ‘Active versus expectant management in the third stage of labour’ (2000) 3 Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, art. no. CD000007Google Scholar

Prescott, S. L. and Clifton, V., ‘Asthma and pregnancy: emerging evidence of epigenetic interactions in utero’ (2009) 9(5) Current Opinion in Allergy and Clinical Immunology 417–26Google Scholar

Proctor, S. J., Dickinson, A. M., Parekh, T. and Chapman, C., ‘Umbilical cord blood banks in the UK have proved their worth and now deserve a firmer foundation’ (2001) 323 British Medical Journal 60–61Google Scholar

Purdy, Laura, Reproducing Persons (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1996)Google Scholar

Quigley, Muireann, ‘Property: the future of human tissue?’ (2009) 17 Medical Law Review 457–66Google Scholar

Rabinow, Paul, French DNA: Trouble in Purgatory (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999)Google Scholar

Radin, Margaret J., Contested Commodities: The Trouble with Trade in Sex, Children, Body Parts and Other Things (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1996)Google Scholar

Ragone, Helena, Surrogate Motherhood: Conception in the Heart (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1996)Google Scholar

Rajan, Kaushik Sunder, Biocapital: The Constitution of Postgenomic Life (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2006)Google Scholar

Ramesh, Randeep, ‘NHS patient data to be made available to drug and insurance firms’ (2014) 19 January, www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jan/19/nhs-patient-data-available-companies-buy, accessed 2 August 2016Google Scholar

Reigstad, M. M., Larsen, J. K., Myklebuss, T. A. et al., ‘Cancer risk among parous women following assisted reproductive technology’ (2015) 30(8) Human Reproduction 1952–63Google Scholar

Remond-Gouilloud, Martin, ‘L'avenir du patrimoine’ (1995) Esprit, November, p. 216Google Scholar

Resnik, David B., ‘The commodification of human reproductive materials’ (1998) 24 Journal of Medical Ethics 288–93Google Scholar

Resnik, David B., ‘Regulating the market for human eggs’ (2001) 15(1) Bioethics 1–26Google Scholar

Resnik, David B., ‘The commercialization of human stem cells: ethical and policy issues’ (2002) 10 Health Care Analysis 127–54Google Scholar

Commission, Retained Organs, A Consultation Document on Unclaimed and Unidentifiable Organs and Tissue: A Possible Regulatory Framework (London: National Health Service, 2002)Google Scholar

Riben, Mirah, ‘American surrogate death: NOT the first’ (2015) Huffpost Blog, 15 OctoberGoogle Scholar

Ricœur, Paul, Oneself as Another, trans. Blamey, Kathleen (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992)Google Scholar

Ricœur, Paul, Réflexion faite: autobiographie intellectuelle (Paris: Editions Esprit, 1995)Google Scholar

Rocha, Vanderson, Wagner, John E., Jr., Sobocinski, Kathleen E. et al., ‘Graft-versus-host disease in children who have received a cordblood or bone marrow transplant from an HLA-identical sibling’ (2000) 342(25) New England Journal of Medicine 1846–54Google Scholar

Rocha, Vanderson, Labopin, M., Sans, G. et al., ‘Transplants of umbilical cord blood or bone marrow from unrelated donors in adults with leukaemia’ (2004) 351 New England Journal of Medicine 2276–85Google Scholar

Rogers, Ian and Casper, Robert F., ‘Lifeline in an ethical quagmire: umbilical cord blood as an alternative to embryonic stem cells’ (2004) 2(2) Sexuality, Reproduction and Menopause 64–70Google Scholar

Rose, Carol M., ‘The comedy of the commons: customs, commerce and inherently public property’ (1986) 53(3) University of Chicago Law Review 711–81Google Scholar

Rose, Carol M., Property and Persuasion: Essays on the History, Theory and Rhetoric of Ownership (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1994)Google Scholar

Rose, Hilary, ‘Gendered genetics in Iceland’ (2001) 20(2) New Genetics and Society 119–38Google Scholar

Rose, Hilary, ‘An ethical dilemma: the rise and fall of UmanGenomics – the model biotech company?’ (2004) 425 Nature 123–24Google Scholar

Rothstein, Mark A., ‘Expanding the ethical analysis of biobanks’ (2005) 33(1) Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 89–101Google Scholar

Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG), Scientific Advisory Committee Opinion Paper No. 2: Cord Blood Banking (London: RCOG, 2001)Google Scholar

Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG), Umbilical Cord Blood Banking: Scientific Advisory Committee Paper No. 2 (London: RCOG, 2006)Google Scholar

Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG), Clamping of the Umbilical Cord and Placental Infusion: Scientific Impact Paper No. 14 (London: RCOG, 2015)Google Scholar

Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) and Royal College of Midwives (RCM), RCOG/RCM Statement on Umbilical Cord Blood Collection and Banking (London: RCOG/RCM, 2011)Google Scholar

Rubinstein, P., Rosenfeld, R. E., Adamson, J. W. and Stevens, C. E., ‘Stored placental blood for unrelated bone marrow reconstitution’ (1993) 81 Blood 1679–90Google Scholar

Ryan, Alan, Property and Political Theory (Oxford: Blackwell, 1984)Google Scholar

Ryan, Alan, ‘Exploitation’, in Miller, David, Coleman, Janet, Connolly, William and Alan, Ryan (eds), The Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Political Thought (Oxford: Blackwell, 1987), pp. 143–44Google Scholar

Ryan, Alan, ‘Self-ownership, autonomy and property rights’ (1994) 11 Social Philosophy and Policy 241Google Scholar

Salter, Brian, ‘Patenting, morality and human embryonic stem cell science: bioethics and cultural politics in Europe’ (2007) 2 Regenerative Medicine 301–11Google Scholar

Sample, Ruth, Exploitation: What It Is and Why It's Wrong (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2003)Google Scholar

Saravanan, Sheela, ‘“Humanitarian” thresholds of the fundamental feminist ideologies: evidence from surrogacy arrangements in India’ (2016) 6(20) Analize: Journal of Gender and Feminist Studies 66–88Google Scholar

Satz, Debra, Why Some Things Should Not Be for Sale (New York: Oxford University Press, 2010)Google Scholar

Sautier, René, ‘Économie et éthique à propos d'un intervenant incommode mais inéluctable dans le domaine des sciences de la vie et de la santé, ou comment l’économie doit être pris en compte dans les avis du CCNE,’ in Sicard, Didier (ed.), Vingt ans de travaux du CCNE (Paris: CCNE, 2002), pp. 732–36Google Scholar

Scheper-Hughes, Nancy, ‘Commodity fetishism in organs trafficking’ (2001) 7 Body and Society 31–62Google Scholar

Scheper-Hughes, Nancy, ‘Bodies for sale – whole or in parts’ (2002) 7 Body and Society 1–8Google Scholar

Schneider, Ingrid and Schumann, Claudia, ‘Stem cells, therapeutic cloning, embryo research–women as raw material suppliers for science and industry’, in Hermann, Svea Luise and Kurmann, Margaretha (eds), Reproductive Medicine and Genetic Engineering: Women between Self-Determination and Societal Standardisation (Berlin: ReproKult Frauen Forum Fortpflanzungsmedizin, 2001), pp. 70–79Google Scholar

Schneider, J., ‘Fatal colon cancer in a young egg donor: a physician mother's call for follow-up and research on the long-term risks of ovarian stimulation’ (2008) 90(5) Fertility and Sterility 2016e-2016e5Google Scholar

Schroeder, J. L., ‘Chix nix bundle-o-stix: a feminist critique of the disaggregation of property’ (1994) 83 Michigan Law Review 239–319Google Scholar

Schultz, Susanne and Braun, Kathrine, ‘Procuring tissue: regenerative medicine, oocyte mobilisation and feminist politics,’ in Webster, Andrew (ed.), The Global Dynamics of Regenerative Medicine: A Social Science Critique (New York: Springer, 2013), pp. 118–49Google Scholar

Scott, Elizabeth S., ‘Surrogacy and the politics of commodification’ (2009) 72 Law and Contemporary Problems 109–46Google Scholar

Scully, Jackie Leach, ‘Normative ethics and non-normative embodiment’ (2004) paper presented at the Feminist Approaches to Bioethics conference, Sydney, NovemberGoogle Scholar

Senituli, Lopeti, ‘They came for sandalwood, now the b…s are after our genes!’ (2004) paper presented at the conference ‘Research ethics, tikanga Maori/indigenous and protocols for working with communities’, Wellington, New Zealand, 10–12 JuneGoogle Scholar

Shiffrin, Seana Valentine, ‘Lockean arguments for private intellectual property’, in Stephen, R. Munzer (ed.), New Essays in the Legal and Political Theory of Property (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), pp. 138–67Google Scholar

Shiva, Vandana, Biopiracy: The Plunder of Nature and Knowledge (Boston: South End Press, 1997)Google Scholar

Sigurdsson, Skuli, ‘Yin-yang genetics, or the HSD deCODE controversy’ (2001) 20(2) New Genetics and Society 103–17Google Scholar

Sistare, Christine T., ‘Reproductive freedom and women's freedom: surrogacy and autonomy’, in Jaggar, Alison M. (ed.), Living with Contradictions: Controversies in Feminist Social Ethics (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1994), pp. 395–401Google Scholar

Skene, Loane, ‘Raising issues with a property law approach’, in Goold, Imogen, Greasley, Kate, Herring, Jonathan and Skene, Loane (eds), Persons, Parts and Property: How Should We Regulate Human Tissue in the 21st Century? (Oxford: Hart, 2014), pp. 263–79Google Scholar

Skloot, Rebecca, ‘Taking the least of you: the tissue-industrial complex’ (2006) New York Times, 16 AprilGoogle Scholar

Skolbekken, John-Arne, Ursin, Lars Oystein, Solberg, Berge et al., ‘Not worth the paper it's written on? Informed consent and biobank research in a Norwegian context’ (2005) 15(4) Critical Public Health 335–47Google Scholar

Sleeboom-Faulkner, Margaret, Global Morality and Life Science Practices in Asia: Assemblages of Life (Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014)Google Scholar

Smith, Stephen A., Contract Theory (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004)Google Scholar

Spar, Debora, The Baby Business: How Money, Science, and Politics Drive the Commerce of Conception (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2006)Google Scholar

Spar, Debora, ‘Free markets, free choice: a market approach to reproductive rights’, in Goodwin, Michele Bratcher (ed.), Baby Markets: Money and the New Politics of Creating Families (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010), pp. 177–90Google Scholar

Steinbock, Bonnie, ‘Payment for egg donation and surrogacy’ (2004) 71(4) Mt Sinai Journal of Medicine 55–65Google Scholar

Steinbrook, Robert, ‘Egg donation and human embryonic stem-cell research’ (2006) 354 New England Journal of Medicine 324–26Google Scholar

Sterckx, Sigrid, Biotechnology, Patents and Morality (2nd edn, Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 2000)Google Scholar

Sterckx, Sigrid, ‘Embryo stem cell patenting’ (2005) paper presented at the fifth workshop of the EC PropEur project, Bilbao, DecemberGoogle Scholar

Sterckx, Sigrid, Rakic, Vojin, and Cockbain, Julian, ‘“You hoped we would sleepwalk into accepting the collection of our data”: controversies surrounding the UK care.data scheme and their wider relevance for biomedical research’ (2016) 19 Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 177–90Google Scholar

Stewart, Cameron, Aparicio, Lorena C. and Kerridge, Ian H., ‘Ethical and legal issues raised by cord blood banking – the challenges of the new bioeconomy’ (2013) 199 Medical Journal of Australia 290–92Google Scholar

Stewart, Cameron, Lipworth, Wendy, Aparicio, Lorena et al., ‘The problem of biobanking and the law of gifts’, in Goold, Imogen, Greasley, Kate, Herring, Jonathan and Skene, Loane (eds), Persons, Parts and Property: How Should We Regulate Human Tissue in the 21st Century? (Oxford: Hart, 2014), pp. 25–38Google Scholar

Stock, Gregory, ‘Eggs for sale: how much is too much?’ (2001) 1(4) American Journal of Bioethics 26–27Google Scholar

Stranger, Mark, Chalmers, Donald and Nicol, Dianne, ‘Capital, trust and consultation: databanks and regulation in Australia’ (2005) 15(4) Critical Public Health 349–58Google Scholar

Sugarman, Jeremy, Reisner, Emily G. and Kurtzberg, Joanne, ‘Ethical issues of banking placental blood for transplantation’ (1995) 274 Journal of the American Medical Association 1763–85Google Scholar

Sullivan, Mark, ‘23andMe has signed 12 other genetic data partnerships beyond Pfizer and Genentech,’ Venturebeat.com, 14 January 2015, http://venturebeat.com/2015/01/14/23andme-has-signed-12-other-genetic-data-partnerships-beyond-pfizer-and-genentech/, accessed 7 June 2016Google Scholar

Sulston, John, ‘Staking claims in the biotechnology Klondike’ (2007) 84 Bulletin of the World Health Organisation 412–13Google Scholar

Sulston, John and Ferry, Georgina, The Common Thread: Science, Politics, Ethics and the Human Genome (London: Corgi, 2003)Google Scholar

Sutcliffe, A. G., Williams, C. L., Jones, M. E. et al., ‘Ovarian tumor risk in women after assisted reproductive therapy (ART); 2.2 million person years of observation in Great Britain’ (2015) 104 (3) Fertility and Sterility e37Google Scholar

Tachibana, M., Amato, P., Sparman, M. et al., ‘Towards germline gene therapy of inherited mitochondrial disease’ (2012) 493 Nature 627–31Google Scholar

Taylor, R. W. and Turnbull, D. M., ‘Mitochondrial DNA mutations in human disease’ (2005) 6 Nature Reviews Genetics 389–402Google Scholar

Taylor, Robert S., ‘A Kantian defense of self-ownership’ (2004) 12(1) Journal of Political Philosophy 65–78Google Scholar

Thambisetty, Sivaramjani, Human Genome Patents and Developing Countries (London: Department for International Development, Commission on Intellectual Property Rights, 2002)Google Scholar

Thorsteindottir, Halla, Daar, Abdalla S., Smith, Richard D. and Singer, Peter A., ‘Commentary: Genomics – a global public good?’ (2003) 363 The Lancet 891–92Google Scholar

Thouvénin, Dominique, ‘Autour du don et de la gratuité’ (2002) Revue générale de droit médical, Numéro spécial: droit santé 99–108Google Scholar

Till, James, Tritcher, David A., Senituli, Lopeti and Boyes, Margaret, ‘Selling genes: constructing a population genetic database on Tonga,’ in Lavery, James V., Grady, Christine, Wahl, Elizabeth R. and Emanuel, Ezekiel (eds), Ethical Issues in International Biomedical Research: A Casebook (New York: Oxford University Press, 2007), pp. 43–63Google Scholar

Tipene-Matua, B. and Wakefield, B., ‘Establishing a Maori ethical framework for genetic research with Maori’, in Henaghan, M. (ed.), Genes, Society and the Future (Wellington, New Zealand: Brookers, 2007), vol. III, pp. 379–422Google Scholar

Titmuss, Richard M., The Gift Relationship: From Human Blood to Social Policy, eds Oakley, Ann and Ashton, J. (2nd edn, London: LSE Books, 1997)Google Scholar

Tober, Diane, ‘Semen as gift, semen as goods: reproductive workers and the market in altruism’ (2001) 7 Body and Society 137–60Google Scholar

Katarina, Trimmings and Beaumont, Paul (eds), International Surrogacy Arrangements: Legal Regulation at the International Level (Oxford: Hart, 2013)Google Scholar

UNESCO Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights (1997), http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=13177&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.htmlGoogle Scholar

UK Department of Health (DOH), Human Bodies, Human Choices: The Law on Human Organs and Tissue in England and Wales (London: DOH, 2002)Google Scholar

UK Department of Health (DOH) Mitochondrial Donation (London: DOH, 2014)Google Scholar

UK Parliament, House of Commons, Select Committee on Science and Technology Fifth Report (2005)Google Scholar

US National Academies, ‘Report proposes structure for national network of cord blood stem cell banks’ (2005), 18 April, www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/04/050418095036.htm, accessed 14 June 2016Google Scholar

US National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC), Research Involving Human Biological Materials: Ethical Issues and Policy Guidance (Rockville, MD: NBAC, 1999)Google Scholar

US National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, ‘About the GDC’ (2014) https://gdc.nci.nih.gov/about-gdc, accessed 14 June 2016Google Scholar

Van Assche, K., Gutwirth, S. and Sterckx, S., ‘Protecting dignitary interests of biobank research participants: lessons from Havasupai Tribe v. Arizona Board of Regents’ (2013) 5(1) Law, Innovation and Technology 54–84Google Scholar

Van Rheenen, Patrick and Brabin, Bernard J., ‘Late umbilical cord-clamping as an intervention for reducing iron deficiency anaemia in term infants in developing and industrialised countries: a systematic review’ (2004) 24 Annals of Tropical Paediatrics 3–16Google Scholar

Waldby, Catherine, ‘Biomedicine, tissue transfer and intercorporeality’ (2002) 3(3) Feminist Theory 239–54Google Scholar

Waldby, Catherine and Cooper, Melinda, ‘From reproductive work to regenerative labour: the female body and the stem cell industries’ (2010) 11 Feminist Theory 3–22Google Scholar

Waldby, Catherine and Cooper, Melinda, ‘The biopolitics of reproduction: post-Fordist biotechnology and women's clinical labour’ (2008) 23 Australian Feminist Studies 57–73Google Scholar

Waldby, Catherine and Mitchell, Robert, Tissue Economies: Blood, Organs and Cell Lines in Late Capitalism (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2006)Google Scholar

Waldron, Jeremy, The Right to Private Property (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988)Google Scholar

Wall, Jesse, ‘The legal status of body parts: a framework’ (2011) 31(4) Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 783–804Google Scholar

Wall, Jesse, Being and Owning: The Body, Bodily Material, and the Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015)Google Scholar

Wallace, Susan and Stewart, Alison, Cord Blood Banking: Guidelines and Prospects (Cambridge: Genetic Knowledge Park, 2004)Google Scholar

Warren, Mary Anne, ‘The moral significance of the gene’, in Burley, J. and Harris, J. (eds), A Companion to Genethics (Oxford: Blackwell, 2002), pp. 147–57Google Scholar

Weeks, Andrew, ‘Umbilical cord clamping after birth: better not to rush’ (2007) 335 British Medical Journal 312–13Google Scholar

Wellcome Trust and Medical Research Council (MRC), Assessing Public Attitudes to Health Related Findings in Research (London: Wellcome Trust and MRC, 2012)Google Scholar

Wert, Guido de, Meulen, Ruud ter, Mordacci, Roberto and Tallachini, Mariachiara, Ethics and Genetics: A Workbook for Practitioners and Students (Oxford: Berghahn Books, 2003)Google Scholar

Wertheimer, Alan, Exploitation (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996)Google Scholar

Widdows, Heather, ‘The impact of new reproductive technologies on concepts of genetic relatedness and non-relatedness’, in Widdows, Heather, Alkorta Idiakez, Itziar and Emaldi Cirion, Aitziber (eds), Women's Reproductive Rights (Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006), pp. 151–64Google Scholar