Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Persons and women, not womb-givers

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Persons and women, not womb-givers: Reflections on gestational surrogacy and uterus transplantation

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Persons and women, not womb-givers: Reflections on gestational surrogacy and uterus transplantation. / Cavaliere, Giulia.
In: Bioethics, Vol. 36, No. 9, 30.11.2022, p. 989-996.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Cavaliere G. Persons and women, not womb-givers: Reflections on gestational surrogacy and uterus transplantation. Bioethics. 2022 Nov 30;36(9):989-996. Epub 2022 Aug 23. doi: 10.1111/bioe.13078

Author

Bibtex

@article{92a41a84d3e540f5832e2752d4951624,
title = "Persons and women, not womb-givers: Reflections on gestational surrogacy and uterus transplantation",
abstract = "In a recent article in this journal, Alex Mullock, Elizabeth Chloe Romanis and Dunja Begovi{\'c} provide an analysis of gestational surrogacy and uterus transplantation (UTx) from the perspective of those who may decide to act as gestational surrogates and womb donors, referred to as 'womb-givers'. In this article, I advance two sets of claims aimed at critically engaging with some aspects of their analysis. Firstly, I argue that the expression 'womb-givers' obscures the biologically, socially and politically salient issue that those who engage in these practices are primarily persons and women. My contention is that this is of substance in discussions of the burdens and benefits of gestational surrogacy and UTx, which need to consider the specific position that women occupy in society, and the hierarchies that mediate their lives, experiences and preferences. Second, I argue that, if one were to take seriously the experiences and preferences of the women who may engage in these practices, and their bodily autonomy, then gestational surrogacy and UTx should be regarded as biologically and sociopolitically incommensurable. Mullock et al. overlook important aspects of gestational surrogacy, such as the embodied nature of pregnancy and childbirth, the sociopolitical significance of these experiences, and the often-oppressive social norms that shape them. Whilst biology is not destiny, I suggest that it is socially and politically 'sticky' when it comes to this significance and norms, especially within the sphere of reproduction. Towards the end of the article, I query the authors' conceptualisation of bodily autonomy and of the instruments that enable its respect and promotion. [Abstract copyright: {\textcopyright} 2022 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.]",
keywords = "embodiment, bodily autonomy, gestational surrogacy, gestation, assisted reproduction, uterus transplantation",
author = "Giulia Cavaliere",
year = "2022",
month = nov,
day = "30",
doi = "10.1111/bioe.13078",
language = "English",
volume = "36",
pages = "989--996",
journal = "Bioethics",
issn = "0269-9702",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "9",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Persons and women, not womb-givers

T2 - Reflections on gestational surrogacy and uterus transplantation

AU - Cavaliere, Giulia

PY - 2022/11/30

Y1 - 2022/11/30

N2 - In a recent article in this journal, Alex Mullock, Elizabeth Chloe Romanis and Dunja Begović provide an analysis of gestational surrogacy and uterus transplantation (UTx) from the perspective of those who may decide to act as gestational surrogates and womb donors, referred to as 'womb-givers'. In this article, I advance two sets of claims aimed at critically engaging with some aspects of their analysis. Firstly, I argue that the expression 'womb-givers' obscures the biologically, socially and politically salient issue that those who engage in these practices are primarily persons and women. My contention is that this is of substance in discussions of the burdens and benefits of gestational surrogacy and UTx, which need to consider the specific position that women occupy in society, and the hierarchies that mediate their lives, experiences and preferences. Second, I argue that, if one were to take seriously the experiences and preferences of the women who may engage in these practices, and their bodily autonomy, then gestational surrogacy and UTx should be regarded as biologically and sociopolitically incommensurable. Mullock et al. overlook important aspects of gestational surrogacy, such as the embodied nature of pregnancy and childbirth, the sociopolitical significance of these experiences, and the often-oppressive social norms that shape them. Whilst biology is not destiny, I suggest that it is socially and politically 'sticky' when it comes to this significance and norms, especially within the sphere of reproduction. Towards the end of the article, I query the authors' conceptualisation of bodily autonomy and of the instruments that enable its respect and promotion. [Abstract copyright: © 2022 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.]

AB - In a recent article in this journal, Alex Mullock, Elizabeth Chloe Romanis and Dunja Begović provide an analysis of gestational surrogacy and uterus transplantation (UTx) from the perspective of those who may decide to act as gestational surrogates and womb donors, referred to as 'womb-givers'. In this article, I advance two sets of claims aimed at critically engaging with some aspects of their analysis. Firstly, I argue that the expression 'womb-givers' obscures the biologically, socially and politically salient issue that those who engage in these practices are primarily persons and women. My contention is that this is of substance in discussions of the burdens and benefits of gestational surrogacy and UTx, which need to consider the specific position that women occupy in society, and the hierarchies that mediate their lives, experiences and preferences. Second, I argue that, if one were to take seriously the experiences and preferences of the women who may engage in these practices, and their bodily autonomy, then gestational surrogacy and UTx should be regarded as biologically and sociopolitically incommensurable. Mullock et al. overlook important aspects of gestational surrogacy, such as the embodied nature of pregnancy and childbirth, the sociopolitical significance of these experiences, and the often-oppressive social norms that shape them. Whilst biology is not destiny, I suggest that it is socially and politically 'sticky' when it comes to this significance and norms, especially within the sphere of reproduction. Towards the end of the article, I query the authors' conceptualisation of bodily autonomy and of the instruments that enable its respect and promotion. [Abstract copyright: © 2022 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.]

KW - embodiment

KW - bodily autonomy

KW - gestational surrogacy

KW - gestation

KW - assisted reproduction

KW - uterus transplantation

U2 - 10.1111/bioe.13078

DO - 10.1111/bioe.13078

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 35996925

VL - 36

SP - 989

EP - 996

JO - Bioethics

JF - Bioethics

SN - 0269-9702

IS - 9

ER -