Research


This page includes literature written by experts in the areas of surrogacy and donor conception. 

 


Barbara Katz Rothman, “The Meanings of Choice in Reproductive Technology,” in Test-Tube Women: What Future for Motherhood, eds. Rita Arditti, Renate Duelli Klein and Shelley Minden (London, UK: Pandora, 1984).


Julie Murphy, “Egg Farming and Women’s Future,” in Test-Tube Women: What Future for Motherhood, eds. Rita Arditti, Renate Duelli Klein and Shelley Minden (London, UK: Pandora, 1984).


John A. Robertson, “Embryos, Families, and Procreative Liberty: The Legal Structure of the New Reproduction,” Southern California Law Review 59, no. 5 (1986): 93-1041.


Michelle Stanworth, “Reproductive Technologies and the Deconstruction of Motherhood,” in Reproductive Technologies: Gender, Motherhood, and Medicine, ed. Michelle Stanworth (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1987).


Ann Oakley, “From Walking Wombs to Test-Tube Babies,” in Reproductive Technologies: Gender, Motherhood and Medicine, ed. Michelle Stanworth (Minneapolis: Minnesota University Press, 1987).



Annette Baran and Reuben Pannor, Lethal Secrets: The Psychology of Donor Insemination: Problems and Solutions, (New York: Warner Books, 1989).


Janice G. Raymond, Women as Wombs: Reproductive Technologies and the Battle over Women’s Freedom (New York: HarperCollins, 1993).



Government of Canada, Royal Commission on New Reproductive Technologies., Proceed with Care, 1989, Z1-1989/3E-PDF, Ottawa- Ontario: Privy Council Office c1993.


Michael Freeman, “The New Birth Right? Identity and the Child of the Reproductive Revolution,” The International Journal of Children’s Rights 4, no. 3 (1996).



Lorna Weir and Jasmin Habib, “A Critical Feminist Analysis of the Final Report of the Royal Commission on New Reproductive Technologies,” Studies in Political Economy 52, no. 1 (1997).


A.J. Turner and A. Coyle, “What Does it Mean to be a Donor Offspring? The Identity Experiences of Adults Conceived by Donor Insemination and the Implications for Counseling and Therapy,” Human Reproduction 15, no. 9 (2000): 2041-51.



G. McGee et al., “Gamete Donation and Anonymity: Disclosure to Children Conceived with Donor Gametes Should Not be Optional,” Human Reproduction 16, no. 10 (2001): 2033-6.


Geraldine Hewitt, “Missing Links: Identity Issues of Donor Conceived People,” Journal of Fertility Counselling 9, no. 3 (2002): 14-20.



Maggie Kirkman, “Genetic Connection and Relationships in Narratives of Donor-Assisted Conception,” Australian Centre for Emerging Technologies and Society 2, no. 1 (2004): 1-20.


Eric Blyth and Abigail Farrand, “Anonymity in Donor-Assisted Conception and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child,” The International Journal of Children’s Rights 12, no. 2 (2004).



J.E. Scheib, M. Riordan, and S. Rubin, “Adolescents with open-identity sperm donors: reports from 12-17 year olds,Human Reproduction 20, no. 1 (2005): 239–52.


Elizabeth Wincott and Marilyn Crenshaw, “From a Social Issue to Policy: Social Work’s Advocacy for the Rights of Donor Conceived People to Genetic Origins Information in the United Kingdom,” Social Work in Health Care 43, no. 2-3 (2006).


Jaap Doek, “Article 8: The Right to Preservation of Identity,” in A Commentary of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (Leiden, Netherlands: Brill Publishers, 2006).


Eric Blyth and Lucy Frith, “The U.K.’s Gamete Donor ‘Crisis’ – A Critical Analysis,” Critical Social Policy 28, no. 1 (2008).



V. Jadva, T. Freeman, W. Kramer and S. Golombok. “The Experiences of Adolescents and Adults Conceived by Sperm Donation: Comparisons by Age of Disclosure and Family Type,” Human Reproduction 24, no. 8 (2009):1909–1919.


Joanna Rose, “A Critical Analysis of Sperm Donation Practices: The Personal and Social Effects of Disrupting the Unity of Biological and Social Relatedness for the Offspring,” (PhD diss., Queensland University of Technology, 2009).



Patricia P. Mahlstedt, Kathleen LaBounty, and William Thomas Kennedy, “The Views of Adult Offspring of Sperm Donation: Essential Feedback for the Development of Ethical Guidelines within the Practice of Assisted Reproductive Technology in the United States,” Fertility and Sterility 93, no. 7 (2010): 2236-2246.


Pratten v British Columba (AG), 2012 BCCA 480, 357 DLR (4th) 660 [Pratten], rev’g Pratten v British Columba (AG), 2011 BCSC 656, 2011 BCSC 656 (CanLII) [Pratten BCSC].




J. Readings, L. Blake, P. Casey, V. Jadva, and S. Golombok, “Secrecy, Disclosure and Everything In-Between: Decisions of Parents of Children Conceived by Donor Insemination, Egg Donation and Surrogacy,” Reproductive Biomedicine Online, 22, no. 6 (2011).


Michelle Giroux and Mariana De Lorenzi, “Putting the Child First: A Necessary Step in the Recognition of the Right to Identity,” Canadian Journal of Family Law 27, no. 1 (2011).


Sophia Allan, “Donor Conception, Secrecy, and the Search for Information,” Journal of Law and Medicine 19, no. 4 (2012): 631-650. 



V. Couture, M.A. Dubois, R. Drouin, J.M. Moutquin, and C. Bouffard, “Strengths and Pitfalls of Canadian Gamete and Embryo Donor Registries: Searching for Beneficent Solutions,” Reproductive BioMedicine Online 28, no. 3 (2014).


G. K. D. Crozier and Jennifer L. Johnson and Christopher Hajzler, “At the Intersections of Emotional and Biological Labor: Understanding Transnational Commercial Surrogacy as Social Reproduction,” IJFAB: International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 7, no. 2 (2014).



Alana Cattapan, “Controlling Conception: Citizenship and the Governance of Assisted Reproductive Technologies in Canada (1989-2004)” (PhD diss., York University, 2015).


Sonia Allan, Donor Conception and the Search for Information: From Secrecy and Anonymity to Openness, (Routledge: 2016).



Dana O’Reilly, James Bowen, Kuhan Perampaladas, Riaz Quereshi, Feng Xie, and Edward Hughes, “Feasibility of an Altruistic Sperm Donation Program in Canada: Results from a Population-Based Model,” Reproductive Health 14, no. 8 (2017).


Vanessa Gruben and Angela Cameron, “Donor Anonymity in Canada: Assessing the Obstacles to Openness and Considering a Way Forward,” Alberta Law Review 54, no. 3 (2017).



Pamela M. White, “Canada’s Surrogacy Landscape is Changing: Should Canadians Care?” Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada 39, no. 11 (2017).


Leah Gillman, “Toxic Money or Paid Altruism: The Meaning of Payments for Identity-Release Gamete Donors,” Sociology of Health and Illness 40, no. 4 (2018).


Alison Wheatley, “Danish Sperm Donors and the Ethics of Donation Selection,” Medicine, Healthcare, and Philosophy 21, no. 2 (2018).


We will update this page with links and additional research shortly.