Despite the diverse legal approaches towards surrogacy in Europe, there are common socio-legal arguments attempting to legitimise it amongst the European Union member states. Regardless of the prevailing regulation in each country, surrogacy in general is confronted with common criticisms and faces similar obstacles. For instance, the operative definition of altruism is put under question in countries where altruistic surrogacy is permitted. Surrogacy is also considered an attack on a woman’s dignity and a risk to children’s welfare. Behind such claims, (...) however, rests the common yet unsubstantiated belief in a natural maternal instinct. Furthermore, a clear misunderstanding about the bonding theory still persists. Common debates around surrogacy in Europe show us that, beyond the national margin of appreciation, surrogacy challenges basic definitions of motherhood, filiation and family. These challenges are deeply permeated by gender stereotypes which partially explain the national similarities among the legal diversities. (shrink)

This paper provides an analysis of the complex global reproduction networks driving the rapidly expanding cross-border surrogacy industry in Asia’s reproductive bioeconomy. It sheds light on the unique features of informal surrogacy networks, notable for their flexible business ties and non-standardized surrogate mother recruitment. These factors contribute to heightened vulnerability for surrogate mothers operating within these networks. While previous literature has underscored the merits of labor law in regulating the surrogacy industry, its application in informal cross-border surrogacy remains under-examined. To (...) address this gap, this research delves into innovative labor law strategies with potential to better regulate the surrogacy sector. Drawing inspiration from progressive labor regulations and supply chain strategies in Bulgaria and Australia, the proposed model aims to redefine the traditional employment relationship. This shift is aimed at bolstering protection for surrogate mothers and enforcing accountability throughout the surrogacy business network. The model further advocates for a collective framework that fosters collaboration and mandates the documentation and registration of surrogacy contracts. Moreover, it underscores the critical significance of international collaboration in bridging regulatory gaps and distributing accountability across consumer and supply states. (shrink)

As a method of family formation, cross-border surrogacy is controversial and beset by risks of exploitation. This article extends the literature on surrogacy by examining the way Australian surrogacy promotion and information events represent cross-border surrogacy. It examines the emerging phenomenon of surrogacy events held by a not-for-profit surrogacy organization to promote cross-border surrogacy in Australia—a country that prohibits commercial surrogacy. The article draws on observations from a series of surrogacy events in Australia and online during the 2019–21 time period. (...) It examines the presentations given at these events by surrogacy facilitators, surrogate mothers, and intended parents. We observed four themes: (1) Intended parents are positioned as consumers, (2) the benefits of cross-border commercial surrogacy are highlighted relative to other methods of family formation, (3) the positive side of cross-border surrogacy is accentuated, and (4) reproductive rights are emphasized. These representations run counter to feminist framings of cross-border surrogacy as exploitative and risky. This paper understands that the framing of surrogacy that occurs at these promotion events to be neoliberal in nature. The conceptualization helps explain their consumerist peppiness and commodifying subjectivity. (shrink)

In gestational surrogacy arrangements, the womb is often figured as a holding environment that brings the child of commissioning parents to fruition but does not shape fetal identity. This article probes the racial imaginary of such a figuration—what I term the “nonracializing womb”—where gestation is seen as peripheral to racial transmission. Drawing on feminist science studies frameworks and data from interviews with parents who commissioned surrogates, this article traces the cultural politics of the nonracializing womb, positioning it as an index (...) for broader understandings of race, reproductive labor, and kinship that hinge on nuclear and biogenetic forms. It then problematizes this figure of gestation by engaging emerging research on environmental epigenetics, which offers a lively model of pregnancy as shaping fetal biology, blurring the lines between surrogate and fetus. I argue that epigenetics offers a resource to reimagine gestation as a racializing process, by theorizing race not as solely genetic, but as relational, socio-environmental, and forged through distributed kinship lineages. (shrink)

In a recent article in this journal, Kathryn MacKay advances a defence of ectogenesis that is grounded in this technology’s potential to end—or at least mitigate the effects of—gender‐based oppression. MacKay raises important issues concerning the socialization of women as ‘mothers’, and the harms that this socialization causes. She also considers ectogenesis as an ethically preferable alternative to gestational surrogacy and uterine transplantation, one that is less harmful to women and less subject to being co‐opted to further oppressive ends. In (...) this article, I challenge some of the assumptions that underlie MacKay’s case in favour of ectogenesis by questioning whether the relationship between women’s capacity to gestate and birth children and gender‐based oppression is as strong as MacKay makes it out to be. I subsequently argue that—even if MacKay’s reading of this relationship is accurate—ectogenesis is not a desirable means to end gender‐based oppression. It embodies a strategy that could be used to pursue liberating projects that follow what Iris Marion Young defines as ‘the ideal of assimilation’, but that must be resisted. I then concur with MacKay’s contention that ectogenesis is better than gestational surrogacy and uterine transplantation. My argument is that many of the problematic issues that MacKay herself sees as features of these practices will not disappear with ectogenesis. Finally, I conclude that MacKay’s narrow focus on women’s biology and ectogenesis as a solution to gender‐based oppression results in the overlooking of broader systemic issues that contribute to the upholding of oppressive norms. (shrink)

BackgroundDuring a commercial surrogacy arrangement, the event of embryo transfer can be seen as the formal starting point of the arrangement. However, it is common for surrogates to undergo a failed attempt at pregnancy conception or missed conception after an embryo transfer. This paper attempts to argue that such failed attempts can be understood as a loss. It aims to reconstruct the experiences of loss and grief of the surrogates and the intended parents as a consequence of their collective failure (...) to conceive a surrogate pregnancy.MethodsDrawing on a qualitative study conducted over a period of eight months between 2014 and 2015 at two fertility clinics in Delhi and two in Kolkata, India, this paper examines the experiences of the surrogates and the intended parents when faced with missed conceptions or failed conceptions during a surrogacy arrangement.ResultsWe argue that while the surrogate grieves the non-arrival of a ‘good news’ as an uncertain loss, the intended parents experience yet another, failure in addition to the losses they might have incurred during their previous fertility treatments. The body of the surrogate becomes a site of ‘a lost opportunity’. The surrogate embodies a loss in her quest to achieve social mobility and the intended parents experience a disembodied pregnancy loss. This very emotional experience stands in stark contrast to the conceptualisation of such failed attempts as non-events within the discourse of the surrogacy industry. The experience of loss of the intended parents is recognised but their grief is given no space. We argue that such ambiguity around the nature of losses resulting out of a missed or failed conception during surrogacy is an outcome of lack of interpersonal relationship between the surrogate and the intended parents.ConclusionsSince commercial surrogacy is a relational process, the only way in which the experiences of losses and failures of the actors at the preconception stage can be better addressed is through developing close sharing and understanding between each other through an ethics of care. Therefore, to nurture caring relationships, surrogacy needs to be understood as a moral commitment by –the surrogates and intended parents. To enable such a commitment, there is a need to reconsider the pre-defined and legally regulated professional duty of the doctors, agents and agencies. It cannot be a one-sided commitment, but has to have elements of mutuality. (shrink)

Over the last two decades, social scientists across disciplines have been researching how value is extracted and governed in the reproductive bioeconomy, which broadly refers to the various ways reproductive tissues, bodies, services, customers, workers, and data are inserted into capitalist modes of accumulation. While many of these studies are empirically grounded in single country–based analyses, this paper proposes an integrative political economy framework, structured around the concept of “global fertility chains.” The latter articulates the reproductive bioeconomy as a nexus (...) of intraconnected practices, operations, and transactions between enterprises, states, and households across the globe, through which reproductive services and commodities are produced, distributed, and consumed. Employing a diffractive reading of the literature on commodity chains and care chains, this unified approach scrutinizes the coproduction of value, biology, and technoscience and their governance mechanisms in the accumulation of capital by taking into account the unevenly developed geographies of global fertility chains, their reliance on women’s waged and unwaged reproductive labor, and the networked role of multiple actors at multiple scales without losing sight of the constitutive role of national states in creating demand, organizing supply, and accommodating the distribution of surplus value. We empirically ground this integrative political economy approach of the reproductive bioeconomy through collaborative, multisited fieldwork on transnational reproduction networks in Israel/palestine, Romania, Georgia, and Spain. (shrink)

Research on cross-border reproductive care has shown how the geographical, historical, economic and political contexts in which egg donation takes place shape this transnational practice. As many women offer their oocytes due to their precarious conditions, they become seen as ‘bioavailable bodies’. The presence of these bioavailable bodies is key to the emergence of global egg donation hotspots. We argue that feminist research needs to go beyond the conceptualization of egg donors as bioavailable bodies. We suggest the analysis of ‘reproductive (...) biographies’ as an innovative way to understand the entanglements of the global bioeconomy with intimate experiences of reproduction. We suggest advancing current feminist discussions around clinical labour by studying the entanglements between the global bioeconomy, a neoliberalized healthcare system, systematic feminicide and women’s reproductive biographies, and by revealing how women’s decision to donate results from gendered dependencies, obligations of care and coercive moments in egg donors’ reproductive biographies. (shrink)