The reproductive silk route: transnational mobility of oocytes from Europe to Brazil

References

• Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária (ANVISA). 2018. “2° Relatório de Importação de Amostras Seminais para uso em Reprodução Humana Assistida. Brasília.” http://portal.anvisa.gov.br/documents/4048533/4993603/2o+Relat%C3%B3rio+de+Importa%C3%A7%C3%A3o+de+C%C3%A9lulas+e+Tecidos+Germinativos+para+Uso+em+Reprodu%C3%A7%C3%A3o+Humana+Assistida/1b0811da-de21-4975-9522-b2458a73ec53
   Google Scholar
• Álvarez Plaza, C., A. M. Rivas, and A. Ayala-Rubio. 2020. El Fenómeno de Los Nuevos Emprendedores en la Industria Reproductiva Transfronteriza: entre la Experiencia y la Competencia”. in Etnografía de Los Mercados Reproductivos: actores, Instituciones y Legislaciones. Edited by Ana Maria Rivas and Consuelo Álvarez Plaza, 343–390. Valencia: Tirant lo Blanch.
   Google Scholar
• Bergmann, S. 2011. “Fertility Tourism: Circumventive Routes that Enable Access to Reproductive Technologies and Substances.” Signs 36 (2): 280–288. doi:10.1086/655978.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blyth, E., T. Petra, and W. Tewes. 2011. “CBRC and Psychosocial Counselling: Assessing Needs and Developing an Ethical Framework for Practice.” Reproductive Biomedicine Online 23 (5): 642–651. doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2011.07.009.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carrasco González, M. C. 2015. “Dos nuevas normas comunitarias sobre células y tejidos humanos.” Revista CESCO de Derecho de Consumo 14: 248–249. https://revista.uclm.es/index.php/cesco/article/view/803.
   Google Scholar
• Christianson, M., and J. Bellver. 2018. “Innovations in Assisted Reproductive Technologies: Impact on Contemporary Donor Egg Practice and Future Advances.” Fertility and Sterility 110 (6): 994–1002. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.09.020.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Conselho Federal de Medicina. 2017. “Resolução CFM no. 2168/2017.” http://www.sistemas.cfm.org.br/normas/visualizar/resolucoes/BR/2017/2168.
   Google Scholar
• Conselho Federal de Medicina. 2021. “Resolução CFM no. 2294/2021.” https://www.in.gov.br/en/web/dou/-/resolucao-cfm-n-2.294-de-27-de-maio-de-2021-325671317
   Google Scholar
• Degli Esposti, S., and V. Pavone. 2019. “Oocyte Provision as a (Quasi) Social Market: Insights from Spain.” Social Science & Medicine 234: 112381. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.112381.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deomampo, D. 2016. Transnational Reproduction: Race, Kinship, and Commercial Surrogacy in India. New York: New York University Press.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2015a. “Directive 2015/565/EU.”
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2015b. “Directive 2015/566/EU.”
   Google Scholar
• European Parliament and the Council. 2016. “Directive 2016/679/EU.”
   Google Scholar
• Franklin, S. 2012. “Five Million Miracle Babies Later: The Anthropology of IVF.” In Reproductive Technologies as Global Form: Ethnographies of Knowledge, Practices, and Transnational Encounters, edited by Michi Knecht, Maren Klotz, and Stefan Beck. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ikemoto, L. C. 2009. “Reproductive Tourism: Equality Concerns in the Global Market for Fertility Services.” Law and Inequality: A Journal of Theory and Practice 27: 277–309. https://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/lieq27&i=281.
   Google Scholar
• Inhorn, M. C., and Z. B. Gürtin. 2011. “Cross-Border Reproductive Care: A Future RESEARCH Agenda.” Reproductive Biomedicine Online 23 (5): 665–676. doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2011.08.002.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Inhorn, M. C., and P. Patrizio. 2009. “Rethinking Reproductive “Tourism” as Reproductive “Exile”.” Fertility and Sterility 92 (3): 904–906. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.01.055.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobson, H. 2020. “Cross-Border Reproductive Care in the USA: Who Comes, Why Do They Come, What Do They Purchase?” Reproductive Biomedicine & Society Online 11: 42–47. doi:10.1016/j.rbms.2020.09.003.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Jociles Rubio, M. I. 2020. «Supongo Que si Hubiera Tenido Pasta, No lo Habría Hecho» Motivaciones Para Donar Óvulos e Ideología Del Altruismo.” In Etnografía de los mercados reproductivos: actores, instituciones y legislaciones, edited by A. M. Rivas and C. Alvarez Plaza. Valencia: Tirant lo Blanch.
   Google Scholar
• König, A., and H. Jacobson. 2023. “Reprowebs: A Conceptual Approach to Elasticity and Change in the Global Assisted Reproduction Industry.” Biosocieties 18 (1): 174–196. doi:10.1057/s41292-021-00260-6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krawiec, K. D. 2009. “Altruism and Intermediation in the Market for Babies.” Washington & Lee Law Review 66 (1): 204–257. https://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/waslee66&i=205.
   Google Scholar
• Lemke, T. 2021. “Welcome to Whenever: Exploring Suspended Life in Cryopreservation Practices.” Science, Technology, & Human Values: 016224392110578. doi:10.1177/01622439211057860.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Machin, R. 2022. “Reproducción transnacional con terceros: el mercado reproductivo en Brasil.” Inter DISCIPLINA 10 (28): 27–50. doi:10.22201/ceiich.24485705e.2022.28.83288.
   Google Scholar
• Machin, R., D. Mendosa, and M. H. O. Augusto, and P. A. Monteleone. 2020. “Assisted Reproductive Technologies in Brazil: Characterization of Centers and Profiles from Patients Treated.” JBRA Assisted Reproduction 24 (3): 235–240. doi:10.5935/1518-0557.20200001.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matorras, R. 2005. “Reproductive Exile versus Reproductive Tourism.” Human Reproduction 20 (12): 3571–3571. doi:10.1093/humrep/dei224.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Millbank, J. 2018. “The Role of Professional Facilitators in Cross-Border Assisted Reproduction.” Reproductive Biomedicine & Society Online 6: 60–71. doi:10.1016/j.rbms.2018.10.013.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Miner, S. A. 2019. “Demarcating the Dirty Work: Canadian Fertility Professionals’ Use of Boundary-Work in Contentious Egg Donation.” Social Science & Medicine 221: 19–26. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.11.039.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ministero della Salute. 2020. Relazione Del Ministro Della Salute al Parlamento Sullo Stato di Attuazione Della Legge Contenente Norme in Materia di Procreazione Medicalmente Assistita (Legge 19 Febbraio 2004, n. 40, Articolo 15). Attività Anno 2018 Centri Procreazione Medicalmente Assistita. Roma, ottobre.
   Google Scholar
• Nahman, M. 2016. “Reproductive Tourism: Through the Anthropological Reproscope.” Annual Review of Anthropology 45 (1): 417–432. doi:10.1146/annurev-anthro-102313-030459.
   Google Scholar
• Pennings, G. 2002. “Reproductive Tourism as Moral Pluralism in Motion.” Journal of Medical Ethics 28 (6): 337–341. doi:10.1136/jme.28.6.337.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quaas, A. M., and G. Pennings. 2018. “The Current Status of Oocyte banks: Domestic and International perspectives.” Fertility and Sterility 110 (7): 1203–1208. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.07.013.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rothmar Herrmann, J. 2021. “Applying the Right to Health to Reproductive Rights - The Case of Elective Egg Freezing.” European Human Rights Law Journal 7 (2): 172–180. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3801986.
   Google Scholar
• Schurr, C. 2019. “Multiple Mobilities in Mexicós Fertility Industry.” Mobilities 14 (1): 103–119. doi:10.1080/17450101.2019.1522881.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shenfield, F., J. de Mouzon, G. Pennings, A. P. Ferraretti, A. Nyboe Andersen, G. de Wert, V. Goossens, et al. 2010. “Cross Border Reproductive Care in Six European Countries.” Human Reproduction 25 (6): 1361–1368. doi:10.1093/humrep/deq057.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shenfield, Francoise, Ioannis Messinis, and Tahir Mahmood. 2020. “Ethical Analysis of Cross-Border Reproductive Care.” European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology 252: 568–569. doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2020.07.027.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simopoulou, Mara, Konstantinos Sfakianoudis, Polina Giannelou, Aikaterini Pierouli, Anna Rapani, Evangelos Maziotis, Dionysios Galatis, et al. 2019. “Treating Infertility: Current Affairs of Cross-Border Reproductive Care.” Open Medicine 14 (1): 292–299. doi:10.1515/med-2019-0026.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Souza, M. C. B. 2014. “Latin American and access to Assisted Reproductive Techniques: A Brazilian Perspective.” JBRA Assisted Reproduction 18 (2): 47–51. doi:10.5935/1518-0557.20140004.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Spanish Society of Fertility (SEF). 2020. “Registro Nacional de Actividad 2020. Informe estadístico de Técnicas de Reproducción Asistida.” https://www.registrosef.com/public/docs/sef2020_IAFIV.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Speier, A. R. 2015. “Czech Hosts Creating ‘A Real Home Away from Home’ for North American Fertility Travellers.” Anthropologica 57: 27–39. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24470910.
   Google Scholar
• Speier, A., K. Lozanski, and S. Frohlick. 2020. “Reproductive Mobilities.” Mobilities 15 (2): 107–119. doi:10.1080/17450101.2020.1726644.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weis, C. 2021. “Changing Fertility Landscapes: Exploring the Reproductive Routes and Choices of Fertility Patients from China for Assisted Reproduction in Russia.” Asian Bioethics Review 13 (1): 7–22. doi:10.1007/s41649-020-00156-w.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Whittaker, A., and A. R. Speier. 2010. “‘Cycling Overseas’: Care, Commodification and Stratification in Cross-Border Reproductive Travel.” Medical Anthropology 29 (4): 363–383. doi:10.1080/01459740.2010.501313.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zegers-Hochschild, Fernando, Juan Enrique Schwarze, Javier Crosby, Carolina Musri, and Maria Teresa Urbina. 2019. “Assisted Reproductive Techniques in Latin America: The Latin American Registry, 2015.” JBRA Assisted Reproduction 23 (2): 143–153. doi:10.5935/1518-0557.20190021.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar