SpringerLink
Log in

Babies: Kinship and Relations

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Biolegality

Part of the book series: Biolegalities ((BIOGA))

  • 15 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter focuses on reproductive technologies and demonstrates how they alter the social meaning of biological relations and legal parenthood. The conventional legal arrangement relying on gestational maternity, on the one hand, and social paternity, on the other, is being reorganized by in vitro conceptions, mitochondrial replacement techniques, cryopreservation of gametes, gestational surrogacy, and embryo adoptions. This new potential for engineered reproduction fractionalizes parenthood, making possible various, and new, forms of biological and social parenthood: genetic, gestational, mitochondrial, intentional, adoptive, etc. Nonetheless, many contemporary cases reveal the extent to which legal systems struggle with the normative implications of these new arrangements. Here we investigate the mutating constructions of kinship, maternity, and paternity in and outside of courts as they go through the motions of scientific developments and global processes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Almeling, R. 2011. Sex Cells: The Medical Market for Eggs and Sperm. University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, S. and Wiesemann, C. 2014. Should Postponing Motherhood Via “Social Freezing” Be Legally Banned? An Ethical Analysis. Laws, 3(2), pp. 282–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Besson, S. 2007. Enforcing the Child’s Right to Know Her Origins: Contrasting Approaches Under the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the European Convention on Human Rights. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 21, pp. 137–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowcott, O. 2016. Couple win legal battle against ruling on dead daughter's eggs, The Guardian, 30 June 2016, https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jun/30/couple-win-leave-to-appeal-against-ruling-on-dead-daughterseggs

  • Cahn, Naomi R. 2009. Test Tube Families: Why the Fertility Market Needs Legal Regulation. New York: NYU Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carsten, Janet, ed. 2000. Cultures of Relatedness: New Approaches to the Study of Kinship. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cloatre, E. 2018. Law and ANT (and Its Kin): Possibilities, Challenges, and Ways Forward. Journal of Law and Society, 45(4), pp. 646–663.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dearle, M., 2015. Time for International Surrogacy Regulation: The Complex Minefield of Global Surrogacy Law Is Catching People Out and the Courts Are Left to Pick up the Pieces. The Times. 18 June 2015, https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/time-for-international-surrogacy-regulation-b60rsts5ktm.

  • D’Alton-Harrison, R. 2014. Mater Semper Incertus Est: Who’s Your Mummy? Medical Law Review, 22(3), pp. 357–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diver, A., 2014. A Law of Blood-ties-the ‘Right’ to Access Genetic Ancestry. Springer International Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franklin Sarah. 2013. Biological Relatives: IVF, Stem Cells and the Future of Kinship. Durham: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher, J. 2015. MPs Say Yes to Three-Person Babies. BBC News, February 3. https://www.bbc.com/news/health-31069173

  • Gibbon, S., 2002. Re-examining Geneticization: Family Trees in Breast Cancer Genetics. Science as Culture, 11(4), pp. 429–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haraway, Donna J. 2016. Staying with the trouble: Making Kin in the Chthulucene. Durham: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hird, M. J. 2007. The Corporeal Generosity of Maternity. Body & Society, 13(1), pp. 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howell, S. 2003. Kinning: The Creation of Life Trajectories in Transnational Adoptive Families. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 9(3), pp. 465–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howell, S. 2009. Adoption of the Unrelated Child: Some Challenges to the Anthropological Study of Kinship. Annual Review of Anthropology, 38, pp. 149–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, E. 2018. The Ambiguities of ‘Social’ Egg Freezing and the Challenges of Informed Consent. BioSocieties, 13(1), pp. 21–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jasanoff, S. 2001. Ordering Life: Law and the Normalization of Biotechnology. Politeia, 62, pp. 34–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jasanoff, S. 2006. Just Evidence: The Limits of Science in the Legal Process. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 34(2), pp. 328–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keaney, J., 2022. The racializing womb: Surrogacy and epigenetic kinship. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 47(6), pp. 1157–1179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirksey, E., ed. 2014. The Multispecies Salon. Durham: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kroløkke, C. H. and Adrian, S. W. 2013. Sperm on Ice: Fatherhood and Life After Death. Australian Feminist Studies, 28(77), pp. 263–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lafuente-Funes, S. 2023. The Role of Vitrification in Spanish Reproductive Labs: A Cryo-revolution Led by Strategic Freezing. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 48(4), pp. 752–776.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landecker, H. 2005. Living Differently in Time: Plasticity, Temporality and Cellular Biotechnologies. Culture Machine 7. http://www.culturemachine.net/index.php/cm/article/view/26/33.

  • Lebner, A. 2000. Genetic “Mysteries” and International Adoption: The Cultural Impact of Biomedical Technologies on the Adoptive Family Experience, Family Relations, 49(4), pp. 371–377.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lockwood, G. M. 2011. Social EGG Freezing: The Prospect of Reproductive ‘Immortality’ or a Dangerous Delusion? Reproductive Biomedicine Online, 23(3), pp. 334–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melhuus, M. 2009. Conflicting Notions of Continuity and Belonging: Assisted Reproduction, Law, and Practices in Norway. Social Analysis, 53(3), pp. 148–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitra, S., Schicktanz, S., and Patel, T. 2018. Cross-cultural comparisons on surrogacy and egg donation. Cross-Cultural Comparisons on Surrogacy and Egg Donation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Modell, J. 2002. A Sealed and Secret Kinship: The Culture of Policies and Practices in American Adoption. New York: Berghahn Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mutcherson, K. M. 2016. Procreative Rights in a Postcoital World. The Oxford Handbook of Reproductive Ethics, pp. 159–181. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nash, Catherine. 2002. Genealogical Identities. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 20(1), pp. 27–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nash, Catherine. 2004. Genetic Kinship. Cultural Studies, 18(1), pp. 1–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Purvis, D.E., 2012. Intended Parents and the Problem of Perspective. Yale JL & Feminism, 24, p. 210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rabinow, P. 1998. Artificiality and enlightenment: from sociobiology to biosociality. In The ethics of biotechnology (pp. 101–122). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao, R., 1995. Assisted reproductive technology and the threat to the traditional family. 47, p. 951.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, S. 2015. Maternal Bodies in the Postgenomic Order: Gender and the Explanatory Landscape of Epigenetics. In Richardson, Sarah S. and Stevens, H. (eds.), Postgenomics: Perspectives on Biology After the Genome, pp. 210–231. Durham: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riles, Annelise. 2008. The Anti-network: Private Global Governance, Legal Knowledge, and the Legitimacy of the State. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 56(3), 605–630.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, D. E. 1995. Social Justice, Procreative Liberty, and the Limits of Liberal and the Limits of Liberal Theory: Robertson’s Children of Choice. Law & Social Inquiry, 20(4), pp. 1005–1021.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robertson, John A. 1995. Liberalism and the Limits of Procreative Liberty: A Response to My Critics. Washington and Lee Law Review, 52, p. 233.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schiff, A. R. 1994. Solomonic Decisions in Egg Donation: Unscrambling the Conundrum of Legal Maternity. Iowa Law Review, 80, p. 265.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shildrick, M., 2022. Maternal–Fetal Microchimerism and Genetic Origins: Some Socio-legal Implications. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 47(6), pp. 1231–1252.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strathern, M. 1996. Enabling identity? Biology, choice and the new reproductive technologies. In Hall, S. and Du Gay, P. Questions of cultural identity, PP. 37–45, London: Sage

    Google Scholar 

  • Strathern, M. 1999. Property, Substance, and Effect: Anthropological Essays on Persons and Things. London: Athlone Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strathern, M. 2005. Kinship, Law and the Unexpected: Relatives Are Always a Surprise. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Teubner, G. 2012. Constitutional Fragments: Societal Constitutionalism and Globalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, C. 2009. Kinship in an Infertility Clinic. Feminist Anthropology: A Reader, p. 271. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trimmings, K. and Beaumont, P. 2011. International Surrogacy Arrangements: An Urgent Need for Legal Regulation at International Level. Journal of Private International Law, 7, pp. 627–647.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Beers, B. C. 2018. The Best Me I Can Possibly Be: Legal Subjectivity, Self-Authorship and Wrongful Life Actions in an Age of ‘Genomic Torts’. In Personalised Medicine, Individual Choice and the Common Good, pp. 200–225. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Beers, B., Corrias, L., and Werner, W. G., eds. 2014. Humanity Across International Law and Biolaw. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van de Wiel, L. 2015. Frozen in Anticipation: Eggs for Later. Women’s Studies International Forum, 53, pp. 119–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van de Wiel, L. 2020. Freezing Fertility: Oocyte Cryopreservation and the Gender Politics of Aging. New York: New York University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Wichelen, S. 2016. Postgenomics and Biolegitimacy: Legitimation Work in Transnational Surrogacy. Australian Feminist Studies, 31(88), pp. 172–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Wichelen, S. 2019a. Legitimating Life: Adoption in the Age of Globalization and Biotechnology. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Wichelen, S. 2019b. Law’s Relations in the Regulation of Cross-Border Surrogacy. In Mackie, Vera, Marks, Nicola, and Ferber, Sarah (eds.), The Reproductive Industry: Intimate Experiences and Global Processes. Lanham: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Wichelen, S. 2022. Identity in postgenomic times: Epigenetic knowledge and the pursuit of biological origins. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 47(6), pp. 1131–1156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Wichelen, S. and Keaney, J. 2022. The Reproductive Bodies of Postgenomics. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 47(6), 1111–1130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vora, K. 2015. Re-imagining Reproduction: Unsettling Metaphors in the History of Imperial Science and Commercial Surrogacy in India. Somatechnics, 5(1), pp. 88–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waldby, C. 2015. ‘Banking Time’: Egg Freezing and the Negotiation of Future Fertility. Culture, Health & Sexuality, 17(4), pp. 470–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watt, H. M. 2011. Private International Law Beyond the Schism. Transnational Legal Theory, 2(3), pp. 347–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watt, H. M. 2016. Conflicts of Laws Unbounded: The Case for a Legal-Pluralist Revival. Transnational Legal Theory, 7(3), pp. 313–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whittaker, A. 2018. International surrogacy as disruptive industry in Southeast Asia. Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yngvesson, B. 2010. Belonging in an Adopted World: Race, Identity, and Transnational Adoption. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zafran, R. 2007. Dying to be a Father: Legal Paternity in Cases of Posthumous Conception. Houston Journal of Health Law & Policy, 8, p. 47.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Sonja van Wichelen

  2. University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Marc de Leeuw

Authors
  1. Sonja van Wichelen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marc de Leeuw
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sonja van Wichelen .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

van Wichelen, S., de Leeuw, M. (2024). Babies: Kinship and Relations. In: Biolegality. Biolegalities. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-8749-8_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-8749-8_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-99-8748-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-99-8749-8

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation