Current perspectives on the ethics of selling international surrogacy support services

References

• Bailey A. Reconceiving surrogacy: toward a reproductive justice account of Indian surrogacy. Hypatia. 2011;26(4):715–741.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pande A. Wombs in Labor: Transnational Commercial Surrogacy in India. New York: Columbia University Press; 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Nadimpally S, Majumdar A.. Recruiting to give birth: agent-facilitators and the commercial surrogacy arrangements in India. In: Davies M, editor. Babies for Sale: Transnational Surrogacy, Human Rights and the Politics of Reproduction. London, UK: Zed Books; 2017:65–81.
   Google Scholar
• Almeling R. The Medical Market: Sex Cells for Eggs and Sperm. California: University of California Press; 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Nadimpally S, Venkatachalam D. Marketing reproduction: assisted reproductive technologies and commercial surrogacy in India. Indian J Gend Stud. 2016;23(1):87–104.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nayak P. The three Ms of commercial surrogacy in India: mother, money and medical market. In: Dasgupta S, Dasgupta SD, editors. Globalization and Transnational Surrogacy in India. Maryland, US: Lexington Press; 2014:1–22.
   Google Scholar
• Spar D. For love and money: the political economy of commercial surrogacy. Rev Int Polit Econ. 2005;12(2):287–309.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trimmings K, Beaumont P, editors. International Surrogacy Arrangements: Legal Regulation at the International Level. Oxford: Hart Publishing; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• United Nations [webpage on the Internet]. Convention on the Rights of the Child 1989, Articles 2 and 8. 2017. Available from: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CRC.aspx. Accessed November 10, 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Cheney KE. Preventing exploitation, promoting equity: findings from the international forum on intercountry adoption and global surrogacy 2014. Adopt Foster. 2016;40(1):6–19.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chang M. Womb for rent: India’s commercial surrogacy. Harvard Int Rev. 2009;31(1):11–12.
   Google Scholar
• Saravanan S.. Addressing global issues in surrogacy. In: Sill ES, editor. Handbook of Gestational Surrogacy. International Clinical Practice and Policy Issues. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press; 2016:41–45.
   Google Scholar
• Dasgupta S, Dasgupta SD, editors. Globalization and Transnational Surrogacy in India: Outsourcing Life. UK: Lexington Books; 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Davies M, editor. Babies for Sale: Transnational Surrogacy, Human Rights and the Politics of Reproduction. London, UK: Zed Books; 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Rotabi KS, Bromfield NF. From Intercountry Adoption to Global Surrogacy: A Human Rights History and New Fertility Frontiers. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge; 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Sills ES, editor. Handbook of Gestational Surrogacy: International Clinical Practice and Policy Issues. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press; 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Fronek P, Crawshaw M. The ‘new family’ as an emerging norm: a commentary on the position of social work in assisted reproduction. Br J Soc Work. 2015;45(2):737–746.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rotabi KS, Mapp S, Cheney K, Fong R, Mcroy R. Regulating commercial global surrogacy: the best interests of the child. J Hum Rights Soc Work. 2017;2(3):1–10.
   Google Scholar
• International Social Service [webpage on the Internet]. Experts Meeting to Discuss International Responses to Surrogacy at University of Verona. 2017. Available from: http://www.iss-ssi.org/index.php/en/news1/242-experts-meeting-to-discuss-international-responses-to-surrogacy-at-university-of-verona. Accessed November 10, 2017.
   Google Scholar
• International Social Service. Surrogacy: Prohibition, Permission and Protection. Geneva: Monthly Review, No. (212), International Reference Center for the Rights of Children Deprived of the Families, International Social Service; 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Beeson D, Darnovsky M, Lippman A. What’s in a name? Variations in terminology of third-party reproduction. Reprod Biomed Online. 2015;31(6):805–814.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zegers-Hochschild F, Adamson GD, Dyer S, et al. The international glossary on infertility and fertility care, 2017. Fertil Steril. 2017;108(3):393–406.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crawshaw M, Fronek P, Blyth E, et al. What are children’s ‘best interests’ in international surrogacy? A social work perspective from the UK. In: Davies M, editor. Babies for Sale: Transnational Surrogacy, Human Rights and the Politics of Reproduction. UK: Zed Books; 2017:163–184.
   Google Scholar
• Huber S, Karandikar S, Gezinski L. Exploring Indian surrogates’ perceptions of the ban on international surrogacy. Affilia. Epub October 3, 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Deonandan R. Recent trends in reproductive tourism and international surrogacy: ethical considerations and challenges for policy. Risk Manag Healthc Policy. 2015;8:111–119.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deonandan R, Green S, van Beinum A. Ethical concerns for maternal surrogacy and reproductive tourism. J Med Ethics. 2012;38(12):742–745.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saravanan S. Transnational surrogacy and objectification of gestational mothers. Econ Polit Wkly. 2010;45(16):26–29.
   Google Scholar
• Karandikar S, Gezinski LB, Carter JR, Kaloga M. Economic necessity or noble cause? A qualitative study exploring motivations for gestational surrogacy in Gujarat, India. Affilia. 2014;29(2):224–236.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koert E, Daniluk JC.. Psychological and interpersonal factors in gestational surrogacy. In: Sills ES, editor. Handbook of Gestational Surrogacy: International Clinical Practice and Policy Issues. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press; 2016:70–77.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen E. Surrogacy as international business and national disgrace of Thailand. Asian Anthropol. 2015;14(2):115–132.
   Google Scholar
• Hibino Y, Shimazono Y. Becoming a surrogate online: “message board” surrogacy in Thailand. Asian Bioeth Rev. 2013;5(1):56–72.
   Google Scholar
• Whittaker A. Merit and money: the situated ethics of transnational commercial surrogacy in Thailand. Int J Fem Approaches Bioeth. 2014;7(2):100–120.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pande A. Not an “angel,” not a “whore”. Surrogates as ‘dirty’ workers in India. Indian J Gend Stud. 2009;16(2):141–173.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Čakardić A. Down the neoliberal path: the rise of free choice feminism. AM J Art Media Stud. 2014;14:33–44.
   Google Scholar
• Thwaites R. Making a choice or taking a stand? Choice feminism, political engagement and the contemporary feminist movement. Femin Theory. 2016;18(1):55–68.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tanderup M, Reddy S, Patel T, Nielsen BB. Informed consent in medical decision-making in commercial gestational surrogacy: a mixed methods study in New Delhi, India. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2015;94(5):465–472.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tanderup M, Reddy S, Patel T, Nielsen BB. Reproductive ethics in commercial surrogacy: decision-making in IVF clinics in New Delhi, India. J Bioeth Inq. 2015;12(3):491–501.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirby J. Transnational gestational surrogacy: does it have to be exploitative? Am J Bioeth. 2014;14(5):24–32.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caamano JM. International, commercial, gestational surrogacy through the eyes of children born to surrogates in Thailand: a cry for legal attention. Boston Univ Law Rev. 2016;96(2):571–607.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Combs JR. Stopping the baby-trade: affirming the value of human life through the invalidation of surrogacy contacts: a blueprint for New Mexico. N Mex Law Rev. 1999;29(2):407–428.
   Google Scholar
• Kindregan CP, White D. International fertility tourism: the potential for stateless children in cross-border commercial surrogacy arrangements. Suffolk Transnatl Law R. 2013;36(3):557–626.
   Google Scholar
• Dondorp W, De Wert G, Pennings G, et al. ESHRE task force on ethics and law 20: sex selection for non-medical reasons. Hum Reprod. 2013;28(6):1448–1454.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strange H, Chadwick R. The ethics of nonmedical sex selection. Health Care Anal. 2010;18(3):252–266.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans MI, Britt DW. Multifetal pregnancy reduction: evolution of the ethical arguments. Semin Reprod Med. 2010;28(4):295–302.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knoche JW. Health concerns and ethical considerations regarding international surrogacy. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2014;126(2):183–186.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark EA, Silver RM. Long-term maternal morbidity associated with repeat cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011;205(6 suppl):S2–S10.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silver RM. Implications of the first cesarean: perinatal and future reproductive health and subsequent cesareans, placentation issues, uterine rupture risk, morbidity, and mortality. Semin Perinatol. 2012;36(5):315–323.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karandikar S, Gezinski L, Huber S. Exploring the physical and emotional stress of surrogate pregnancy among transnational Indian surrogates. Int Soc Work. 2017;60(6):1433–1442.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harrison L. “I am the baby’s real mother”: reproductive tourism, race and the transnational construction of kinship. Womens Stud Int Forum. 2014;47(pt A):145–156.
   Google Scholar
• Bos P. Once a Mother: Relinquishment and Adoption from the Perspective of Unmarried Mothers in South India [Ph.D. thesis]. Radboud Universiteit, The Netherlands; 2017. Available from: http://webdoc.ubn.ru.nl/mono/b/bos_g/oncea_mo.pdf. Accessed November 10, 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Oxman RB. Maternal-fetal relationships and nongenetic surrogates. Jurimetrics. 1993;33(3):387.
   Google Scholar
• Quartly M, Swain S, Cuthbert D. The Market in Babies: Stories of Australian Adoption. Clayton, Victoria: Monash University Publishing; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Mohapatra S. Stateless babies and adoption scams: a bioethical analysis of international commercial surrogacy. Berkeley J Int Law. 2012;30(2):412–450.
   Google Scholar
• van den Akker O, Fronek P, Blyth E, Frith L. ‘This neo-natal ménage à trois’: British media framing of transnational surrogacy. J Reprod Infant Psychol. 2015;34(1):1–14. Epub 2015 Nov 17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smart C.. The problem with rights. In: Smart C, editor. Feminism and the Power of the Law. New York: Routledge; 1989:138–159.
   Google Scholar
• Smolin D. Surrogacy as the sale of children: applying lessons learned from adoption to the regulation of the surrogacy industry’s global marketing of children. Pepperdine Law Rev. 2016;43(2):265–344.
   Google Scholar
• Van den Akker O. Surrogate Motherhood Families. London: Palgrave Macmillan; 2017:51.
   Google Scholar
• Cuthbert D, Fronek P. Perfecting adoption: reflections on the rise of commercial offshore surrogacy and family formation in Australia. In: Hayes A, Higgins D, editors. Families, Policy and the Law: Selected Essays on Contemporary Issues for Australia. Melbourne, Victoria: Australian Government and Australian Institute of Family Studies; 2014:55–56.
   Google Scholar
• World Medical Association [webpage on the Internet]. Declaration of Geneva. 2017. Available from: https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-geneva/. Accessed Nov 10, 2017.
   Google Scholar
• International Bar Association [webpage on the Internet]. Principles on Conduct for the Global Legal Profession 2011. 2017. Available from: https://www.ibanet.org/Article/NewDetail.aspx?ArticleUid=BC99FD2C-D253-4BFE-A3B9-C13F196D9E60. Accessed November 10, 2017.
   Google Scholar
• United Nations [webpage on the Internet]. Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948. 2017. Available from: http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/. Accessed November 11, 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Fronek P, Cuthbert D. The future of inter-country adoption: a paradigm shift for this century. Int J Soc Welf. 2012;21(2):215–224.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grisez G. Against consequentialism. Am J Jurispud. 1978;23(1):21–72.
   Google Scholar