Gender, Infertitlity, Motherhood, and Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) in Turkey
Human Reproduction and Genetic Ethics 16 (2):218-232 (2012)
| Abstract | In Turkey, as in many other countries, infertility is generally regarded as a negative phenomenon in a woman’s life and is associated with a lot of stigma by society. In other words, female infertility and having a baby using Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ART) have to be taken into consideration with respect to gender, motherhood, social factors, religion and law. Yet if a woman chooses to use ART she has to deal with the consequences of her decision, such as being ostracized by society. Other types of procedures in this area, such as sperm and ova donation or surrogate motherhood, are not permitted in law. However, both before and after the development of this techonology, society has been finding its own solutions which are rarely questioned and are still performed. This article will discuss what these practices are and try to reach some pragmatic conclusions concerning female infertility, the concept of motherhood and some traditional practices in Turkey | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,653 |
| External links |
  Try with proxy. Try with proxy. |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesSusan L. Crockin (2010). Legal Conceptions: The Evolving Law and Policy of Assisted Reproductive Technologies. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Véronique Fournier, Denis Berthiau, Julie D.’Haussy & Philippe Bataille (forthcoming). Access to Assisted Reproductive Technologies in France: The Emergence of the Patients' Voice. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy.
Enrico Maestri (2011). Fabbriche Della Vita. La Critica Ecofemminista Alle Tecniche Riproduttive Artificiali. Ragion Pratica 37 (2):417-442.
Jennifer Parks (2009). Rethinking Radical Politics in the Context of Assisted Reproductive Technology. Bioethics 23 (1):20-27.
Drew Carter, Amber M. Watt, Annette Braunack-Mayer, Adam G. Elshaug, John R. Moss & Janet E. Hiller (2013). Should There Be a Female Age Limit on Public Funding for Assisted Reproductive Technology? Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 10 (1):79-91.
Maren Klawiter (1990). Using Arendt and Heidegger to Consider Feminist Thinking on Women and Reproductive / Infertility Technologies. Hypatia 5 (3):65 - 89.
Anne Donchin (1989). Review: The Growing Feminist Debate Over the New Reproductive Technologies. [REVIEW] Hypatia 4 (3):136 - 149.
Drew Carter & Annette Braunack-Mayer (2011). The Appeal to Nature Implicit in Certain Restrictions on Public Funding for Assisted Reproductive Technology. Bioethics 25 (8):463-471.
Ruby Catsanos, Wendy Rogers & Mianna Lotz (2013). The Ethics of Uterus Transplantation. Bioethics 27 (2):65-73.
Reyes Lázaro (1986). Feminism and Motherhood: O'Brien Vs Beauvoir. Hypatia 1 (2):87 - 102.
Mairi Levitt (2004). Assisted Reproduction: Managing an Unruly Technology. Health Care Analysis 12 (1):41-49.
Lori B. Andrews (1989). Control and Compensation: Laws Governing Extracorporeal Generative Materials. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 14 (5):541-560.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2012-02-20Total downloads17 ( #70,994 of 548,984 )Recent downloads (6 months)9 ( #7,667 of 548,984 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
