Book contents
- Donor-Linked Families in the Digital Age
- Donor-Linked Families in the Digital Age
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Tables
- Contributors
- Acknowledgements
- Donor-Conceived Families
- Part I ‘DIY’ Donor Linking: Issues and Implications
- Part II Children’s and Adults’ Lived Experiences in Diverse Donor-Linked Families
- Part III Institutionalised Resistance to Openness
- Index
- References
Part II - Children’s and Adults’ Lived Experiences in Diverse Donor-Linked Families
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 13 July 2023
Book contents
- Donor-Linked Families in the Digital Age
- Donor-Linked Families in the Digital Age
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Tables
- Contributors
- Acknowledgements
- Donor-Conceived Families
- Part I ‘DIY’ Donor Linking: Issues and Implications
- Part II Children’s and Adults’ Lived Experiences in Diverse Donor-Linked Families
- Part III Institutionalised Resistance to Openness
- Index
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Donor-Linked Families in the Digital AgeRelatedness and Regulation, pp. 101 - 208Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2023
References
References
Andreassen, R. (2017). New kinships, new family formations and negotiations of intimacy via social media sites. Journal of Gender Studies, 26(3), 361–371. https://doi.org/10.1080/09589236.2017.1287683CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, D. (2014). It’s Complicated: The Social Lives of Networked Teens. Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Cahn, N. R. (2013). The New Kinship: Constructing Donor-Conceived Families. NYU Press.Google Scholar
Davies, K. (2015). Siblings, stories and the self: the sociological significant of young people’s sibling relationships. Sociology, 49(4): 679–695.Google Scholar
Frith, L., Blyth, E., Crawshaw, M., & van den Akker, O. (2018). Searching for ‘relations’ using a DNA linking register by adults conceived following sperm donation. BioSocieties, 13(1), 170–189. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41292-017-0063-2Google Scholar
Hertz, R. (2009). Turning strangers into kin: Half-siblings and anonymous donors. In Nelson, M.K. and Garey, A.I. (Eds.), Who’s Watching?: Daily Practices of Surveillance among Contemporary Families. Vanderbilt University Press, pp. 156–174. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv17vf76w.13Google Scholar
Hertz, R. & Mattes, J. (2011). Donor-shared siblings or genetic strangers: New families, clans and the internet. Journal of Family Issues, 32(9), 1129–1155. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513x11404345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hertz, R., & Nelson, M. K. (2019). Random Families: Genetic Strangers, Sperm Donor Siblings, and the Creation of New Kin. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hertz, R, Nelson, M. K., & Kramer, W. (2017). Donor sibling networks as a vehicle for expanding kinship: a replication and extension. Journal of Family Issues, 38(2), 248–284. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513x16631018Google Scholar
Indekeu, A., Bolt, S. H., & Maas, A. J. B. M. (2021). Meeting multiple donor half siblings: psychosocial challenges. Human Fertility, 1–12, https://doi.org/10.1080/14647273.2021.1872804Google ScholarPubMed
Jamieson, L. (2011), Intimacy as a concept: explaining social change in the context of globalization or another form of ethnocentricism? Sociological Research Online. 16(4), 151–163. Org.uk/16/4/15.html>10.5153/sro.2497Google Scholar
Mamo, L., & Alston-Stepnitz, E. (2015). Queer intimacies and structural inequalities: new directions in stratified reproduction. Journal of Family Issues, 36(4), 519–540. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513x14563796Google Scholar
McKinnon, S. (2015). Productive paradoxes of the assisted reproductive technologies in the context of new kinship. Journal of Family Isses, 36(4), 461–479 https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X14563799CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nordqvist, P. (2017). Genetic thinking and everyday living: on family practices and family imaginaries. The Sociological Review, 65(4): 865–881.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Powell, B. Blozendahl, C., Geist, C., & Steelman, L.C. (2010). Counted Out: Same-Sex Relationships and American’s Definitions of Family. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Scheib, J. E., McCormick, E., Benward, J., & Ruby, A. (2020). Finding people like me: contact among young adults who share an open-identity sperm donor. Human Reproduction Open, 2020(4) 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1093/hropen/hoaa057Google Scholar
Stacey, J. (2011). Unhitched Love: Marriage, and Family Values from Western Hollywood to Western China. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
Strathern, M. (1992). Reproducing the Future: Anthroplogy, Kinship and the Assisted Reproductive Technologies. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Weston, K. (1991), Families We Choose: Lesbian, Gays, Kinship. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
References
ANZICA (2012). Guidelines for professional standards of practice: donor linking counseling. www.fertilitysociety.com.au/wp-content/uploads/20120504-anzica-guidelines-donor-linking-final-version.pdfGoogle Scholar
Blyth, E. (2012). Discovering the ‘facts of life’ following anonymous donor insemination. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 26(2), 143–161. https://doi.org/10.1093/lawfam/ebs006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolt, S. H., Notermans, C., van Brouwershaven, A. C., Maas, A. J. B. M., & Indekeu, A. (2021). The ongoing work of kinship among donor half-siblings in the Netherlands. BioSocieties. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41292-021-00259-zGoogle Scholar
Crawshaw, M., Daniels, K., Adams, D., Bourne, K., van Hooff, J. A. P., Kramer, W., Pasch, L., & Thorn, P. (2016). Emerging models for facilitating contact between people genetically related through donor conception: a preliminary analysis and discussion. Reproductive Biomedicine & Society Online, 1(2), 71–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbms.2015.10.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, T., Jadva, V., & Slutsky, J. (2016). Sperm donors limited: psychosocial aspects of genetic connections and the regulation of offspring. In Golombok, S., Scott, R., Appleby, J. B., Richards, M. & Wilkinson, S. (Eds.), Regulating Reproductive Donation (pp. 165–184). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316117446Google Scholar
Freeman, T., Jadva, V., Tranfield, E., & Golombok, S. (2016). Online sperm donation: a survey of the demographic characteristics, motivations, preferences and experiences of sperm donors on a connection website. Human Reproduction, 31(9), 2082–2089. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dew166Google Scholar
Hertz, R., Nelson, M. K., & Kramer, W. (2017). Donor sibling networks as a vehicle for expanding kinship: A replication and extension. Journal of Family Issues, 38(2), 248–284. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X16631018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hertz, R., & Nelson, M. K. (2019). Random Families: Genetic Strangers, Sperm Donor Siblings and the Creation of New Kin. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190888275.001.0001Google Scholar
Hudson, N. (2017). Making ‘assisted world families’? Parenting projects and family practices in the context of globalized gamete donation. Sociological Research Online, 22(2), 48–58. DOI: 10.5153/sro.4246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Indekeu, A., Bolt, S., Maas, A. (2021a). Meeting multiple same-donor offspring: psychosocial challenges. Human Fertility, 25(4), 677–687. https://doi.org/10.1080/14647273.2021.1872804Google Scholar
Indekeu, A., & Hens, K. (2019). Part of my story: the meaning and experiences of genes and genetics for sperm donor-conceived offspring. New Genetics & Society, 38(1), 18–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/14636778.2018.1549476 Open AccessGoogle Scholar
Indekeu, A., Maas, A. J. B. M., McCormick, E., Benward, J., & Scheib, J. (2021b). Factors associated with searching for people related through donor conception among donor-conceived people, parents and donors: a systematic review. F&S Reviews, 2(2), 93–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xfnr.2021.01.003Google Scholar
Jadva, V., Freeman, T., Kramer, W., & Golombok, S. (2010). Experiences of offspring searching for and contacting their donor siblings and donor. Reproductive Biomedicine Online, 20(4), 523–532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2010.01.001Google Scholar
Janssens, P. M. W., Simons, A. H. M., Van Kooij, R. J., Blokzijl, E., & Dunselman, G. A. J. (2006). A new Dutch Law regulating provision of identifying information of donors to offspring: background, content and impact. Human Reproduction, 21(4), 852–856. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dei407Google Scholar
Johnson, L., Bourne, K., & Hammarberg, K. (2012). Donor conception legislation in Victoria, Australia: the ‘Time to Tell’ campaign, donor-linking and implications for clinical practice. Journal of Law and Medicine, 19(4), 803–19.Google ScholarPubMed
Kelly, F. J., & Dempsey, D. J. (2016). Experiences and motives of Australian single mothers by choice who make early contact with their child’s donor relatives. Medical Law Review, 24(4), 571–590. https://doi-org.kuleuven.e-bronnen.be/10.1093/medlaw/fww038Google Scholar
Montuschi, O., & Ellis, J. (2020). Continuing the Conversation: Talking with Young People and Adults 12yrs and Up. Donor Conception Network.Google Scholar
Mroz, J. (2011). One sperm donor, 150 offspring. New York Times. www.nytimes.com/2011/09/06/health/06donor.htmlGoogle Scholar
Mroz, J. (2021). The case of the serial sperm donor. New York Times. www.nytimes.com/2021/02/01/health/sperm-donor-fertility-meijer.htmlGoogle Scholar
Scheib, J. E., McCornick, E., Benward, J., & Ruby, A. (2020). Finding people like me: contact among young adults who share an open-identity donor. Human Reproduction Open, 2020(4). https://doi.org/10.1093/hropen/hoaa057CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scheib, J. E., & Ruby, A. (2009). Beyond consanguinity risk: developing donor birth limits that consider psychosocial risk factors. Fertility and Sterility, 91(5), 91, e12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.12.071CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schopler, J. H., & Galinsky, M. J. (1993). Support groups as open systems: a model for practice and research. Journal of Health and Social Work, 18(3), 195–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, K. (2016). Limiting offspring numbers: can we justify regulation? In Golombok, S., Scott, R., Appleby, J. B., Richards, M. & Wilkinson, S. (Eds.), Regulating Reproductive Donation (pp. 185–204). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316117446Google Scholar
References
Almeling, Rene. 2011. Sex Cells: The Medical Market for Eggs and Sperm. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Applegarth, Linda D., Kaufman, Nancy L., Josephs-Sohan, Mitasha, Christos, Paul J., and Rosenwaks, Zev. 2016. ‘Parental Disclosure to Offspring Created with Oocyte Donation: Intentions versus Reality’. Human Reproduction, June. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dew125.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
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 (2): 137–59. https://doi.org/10.1093/lawfam/ebm003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blyth, Eric, and Farrand, Abigail. 2004. ‘Anonymity in Donor-Assisted Conception and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child’. The International Journal of Children’s Rights 12 (2): 89–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carsten, Janet. 2000. ‘“Knowing Where You’ve Come from”: Ruptures and Continuities of Time and Kinship in Narratives of Adoption Reunions’. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 6 (4): 687–703.Google Scholar
Cosson, Barbara, Dempsey, Deborah, and Kelly, Fiona. 2021. ‘Secret Shame – Male Infertility and Donor Conception in the Wake of Retrospective Legislative Change’. Men and Masculinities, 25 (3): 497–515. https://doi.org/10.1177/1097184X211038329.Google Scholar
Crawshaw, Marilyn. 2008. ‘Prospective Parents’ Intentions Regarding Disclosure Following the Removal of Donor Anonymity’. Human Fertility 11 (2): 95–100.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dempsey, Deborah. 2010. ‘Conceiving and Negotiating Reproductive Relationships: Lesbians and Gay Men Forming Families with Children’. Sociology 44 (6): 1145–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dempsey, Deborah, Nordqvist, Petra, and Kelly, Fiona. 2022. ‘Beyond Secrecy and Openness: Telling a Relational Story about Children’s Best Interests in Donor-Conceived Families’. BioSocieties 17: 527–48. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41292-021-00225-9.Google Scholar
Freeman, T., and Golombok, S.. 2012. ‘Donor Insemination: A Follow-up Study of Disclosure Decisions, Family Relationships and Child Adjustment at Adolescence’. Reproductive Biomedicine Online 25 (2): 193–203.Google Scholar
Frith, Lucy. 2001. ‘Beneath the Rhetoric: The Role of Rights in the Practice of Non-Anonymous Gamete Donation’. Bioethics 15 (5–6): 473–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8519.00255.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gilman, Leah, and Nordqvist, Petra. 2018. ‘Organizing Openness: How UK Policy Defines the Significance of Information and Information Sharing about Gamete Donation’. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family 32 (3): 316–33. https://doi.org/10.1093/lawfam/eby014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grace, Victoria M., and Daniels, Ken. 2007. ‘The (Ir)Relevance of Genetics: Engendering Parallel Worlds of Procreation and Reproduction’. Sociology of Health & Illness 29 (5): 692–710.Google Scholar
Graham, Susanna, Mohr, Sebastian, and Bourne, Kate. 2016. ‘Regulating the “Good” Donor: The Expectation and Experiences of Sperm Donors in Denmark and Victoria, Australia’. In Regulating Reproductive Donation, edited by Golombok, Susan, Scott, Rosamund, John B. Appleby, , Richards, Martin, and Wilkinson, Stephen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ilioi, Elena, Blake, Lucy, Jadva, Vasanti, Roman, Gabriela, and Golombok, Susan. 2017. ‘The Role of Age of Disclosure of Biological Origins in the Psychological Wellbeing of Adolescents Conceived by Reproductive Donation: A Longitudinal Study from Age 1 to Age 14’. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 58 (3): 315–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12667.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Klotz, Maren. 2014. (K) Information: Gamete Donation and Kinship Knowledge in Germany and Britain. Vol. 32. Frankfurt: Campus Verlag.Google Scholar
Mason, Jennifer. 2004. ‘Personal Narratives, Relational Selves: Residential Histories in the Living and Telling’. The Sociological Review 52 (2): 162–79.Google Scholar
May, Vanessa. 2013. Connecting Self to Society: Belonging in a Changing World. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Mohr, Sebastian. 2018. Being a Sperm Donor: Masculinity, Sexuality, and Biosociality in Denmark. New York: Berghahn Books.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nachtigall, Robert D., Becker, Gay, Szkupinski Quiroga, Seline, and Tschann, Jeanne M.. 1998. ‘The Disclosure Decision: Concerns and Issues of Parents of Children Conceived through Donor Insemination’. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 178 (6): 1165–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9378(98)70318-7.Google Scholar
Nachtigall, Robert D., Tschann, Jeanne M., Szkupinski Quiroga, Seline, Pitcher, Linda, and Becker, Gay. 1997. ‘Stigma, Disclosure, and Family Functioning among Parents of Children Conceived through Donor Insemination’. Fertility and Sterility 68 (1): 83–89.Google Scholar
Nordqvist, Petra. 2014. ‘The Drive for Openness in Donor Conception: Disclosure and the Trouble with Real Life’. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family 28 (3): 321–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nordqvist, Petra, and Gilman, Leah. 2022. Donors: Curious Connections in Donor Conception. London: Emerald Publishing.Google Scholar
Smart, Carol. 2007. Personal Life: New Directions in Sociological Thinking. Cambridge and Malden: Polity Press.Google Scholar
References
Adams, D., & Lorbach, C. (2012). Accessing donor conception information in Australia: A call for retrospective access. Journal of Law and Medicine, 19(4), 707–721.Google Scholar
Allan, S. (2017). Donor Conception and the Search for Information: From Secrecy and Anonymity to Openness. Abingdon: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group.Google Scholar
Barnwell, A. (2019). Family secrets and the slow violence of social stigma. Sociology, 53(6), 1111–1126. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038519846443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beeson, D. R., Jennings, P. K., & Kramer, W. (2011). Offspring searching for their sperm donors: How family type shapes the process. Human Reproduction, 26(9), 2415–2424. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/der202Google Scholar
Blyth, E., Crawshaw, M., Frith, L., & Jones, C. (2012). Donor-conceived people’s views and experiences of their genetic origins: A critical analysis of the research evidence. Journal of Law and Medicine, 19(4).Google Scholar
Boss, P. (2007). Ambiguous loss theory: Challenges for scholars and practitioners. Family Relations, 56(2), 105–110.Google Scholar
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2020). One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? Qualitative Research in Psychology, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238Google Scholar
Broom, A., Kenny, K., & Kirby, E. (2018). On waiting, hauntings and surviving: Chronicling life with cancer through solicited diaries. The Sociological Review, 66(3), 682–699. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038026117719216Google Scholar
Broom, A., Lewis, S., Parker, R., Williams Veazey, L., Kenny, K., Kirby, E., Kokanović, R., Lwin, Z., & Koh, E.-S. (2021). Personhood, belonging, affect and affliction. The Sociological Review, 69(5), 1051–1071. https://doi.org/10.1177/00380261211019266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carsten, J. (2007). Connections and disconnections of memory and kinship in narratives of adoption reunions in Scotland. Ghosts of Memory: Essays on Remembrance and Relatedness, 83–103. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470692301.ch4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cosson, B., Dempsey, D., & Kelly, F. (2021). Secret shame – Male infertility and donor conception in the wake of retrospective legislative change. Men and Masculinities, 25(3), 497–515. https://doi.org/10.1177/1097184X211038329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daniels, K. (2020). The perspective of adult donor conceived persons. In Beier, K., Brügge, C., Thorn, P., & Wiesemann, C. (Eds.), Assistierte Reproduktion mit Hilfe Dritter (pp. 443–459). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-60298-0_29Google Scholar
Darroch, F., & Smith, I. (2021). Establishing identity: How direct‐to‐consumer genetic testing challenges the assumption of donor anonymity. Family Court Review, 59(1), 103–120. https://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dempsey, D. (2006). Beyond choice: Family and kinship in the Australian lesbian and gay “baby boom” [PhD thesis]. La Trobe University.Google Scholar
Dempsey, D., Kelly, F., Horsfall, B., Hammarberg, K., Bourne, K., & Johnson, L. (2019). Applications to statutory donor registers in Victoria, Australia: Information sought and expectations of contact. Reproductive Biomedicine & Society Online, 9, 28–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbms.2019.08.002Google Scholar
Dingle, S. (2021). Brave New Humans: The Dirty Reality of Donor Conception. Hardie Grant Books.Google Scholar
Eng, D. L. (2010). The Feeling of Kinship: Queer Liberalism and the Racialization of Intimacy. Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Freeman, T., Bourne, K., Jadva, V., & Smith, V. (2014). Making connections: Contact between sperm donor relations. In Relatedness in Assisted Reproduction: Families, Origins and Identities (pp. 270–295). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Frith, L., Blyth, E., Crawshaw, M., & van den Akker, O. (2018a). Secrets and disclosure in donor conception. Sociology of Health & Illness, 40(1), 188–203. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.12633CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frith, L., Blyth, E., Crawshaw, M., & van den Akker, O. (2018b). Searching for “relations” using a DNA linking register by adults conceived following sperm donation. BioSocieties, 13(1), 170–189. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41292-017-0063-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, A. F. (2008). Ghostly Matters: Haunting and the Sociological Imagination. University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Gordon, A. F., Hite, K., & Jara, D. (2020). Haunting and thinking from the Utopian margins: Conversation with Avery Gordon. Memory Studies, 13(3), 337–346. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750698020914017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halberstam, J. J., & Halberstam, J. (2005). In a Queer Time and Place: Transgender Bodies, Subcultural Lives. New York University Press.Google Scholar
Harrigan, M. M., Dieter, S., Leinwohl, J., & Marrin, L. (2014). Redefining family: An analysis of adult donor-conceived offspring’s discursive meaning-making. Iowa Journal of Communication, 46(1), 16–32.Google Scholar
Hewitt, G. (2002). Missing links: Identity issues of donor conceived people. Journal of Fertility Counselling, 9, 14–19.Google Scholar
Indekeu, A. (2015). Parent’s expectations and experiences of resemblance through donor conception. New Genetics and Society, 34(4), 398–416. https://doi.org/10.1080/14636778.2015.1098525CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Indekeu, A., & Hens, K. (2019). Part of my storyThe meaning and experiences of genes and genetics for sperm donor-conceived offspring. New Genetics and Society, 38(1), 18–37.Google Scholar
Jadva, V. (2021). Sibling relationships across families created through assisted reproduction. In Brothers and Sisters (pp. 171–184). Springer.Google Scholar
Jadva, V., Freeman, T., Kramer, W., & Golombok, S. (2010). Experiences of offspring searching for and contacting their donor siblings and donor. Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 20(4), 523–532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2010.01.001CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kelly, F. (2010). An alternative conception: The legality of home insemination under Canada’s Assisted Human Reproduction Act. Canadian Journal of Family Law, 26(1), 149–170.Google Scholar
Klotz, M. (2016). Wayward relations: Novel searches of the donor-conceived for genetic kinship. Medical Anthropology, 35(1), 45–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/01459740.2015.1012615Google Scholar
Lambert, C. (2020). The ambivalence of adoption: Adoptive families’ stories. Sociology, 54(2), 363–379. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038519880107Google Scholar
Macmillan, C. M., Allan, S., Johnstone, M., & Stokes, M. A. (2021). The motivations of donor-conceived adults for seeking information about, and contact with, sperm donors. Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 43(1), 149–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2021.04.005Google Scholar
Macpherson, I. (2019). Ethical reflections about the anonymity in gamete donation. Human Reproduction, 34(9), 1847–1848. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dez142Google Scholar
Mason, J. (2004). Personal narratives, relational selves: Residential histories in the living and telling. The Sociological Review, 52(2), 162–179. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.2004.00463.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newman, C. E., Persson, A., Prankumar, S., Lea, T., & Aggleton, P. (2020). Experiences of family belonging among two generations of sexually diverse Australians. Family Relations, 69(2), 292–307. https://doi.org/10.1111/fare.12411Google Scholar
Newsweek. (1934, May 12). “Ghost” fathers: Children provided for the childless. Newsweek, 3(19), 16.Google Scholar
Newton, G. (2022). Doing reflexivity in research on donor conception: Examining moments of bonding and becoming. In Shaw, R. M. (Ed.), Reproductive Citizenship: Technologies, Rights and Relationships. Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Newton, G., Drysdale, K., Zappavigna, M., & Newman, C. E. (2023) Truth, proof, sleuth: trust in direct-to-consumer DNA testing and other sources of identity information among Australian donor-conceived people. Sociology, 57(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/00380385221091184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newton, G., & Southerton, C. (2023) Situated talk: A method for a reflexive encounter with #donorconceived on TikTok. Media International Australia, 186(1), 66–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/1329878X211064646Google Scholar
Newton, G., Zappavigna, M., Drysdale, K., & Newman, C. E. (2022) Memes as bonding icons for belonging in donor-conceived people. Social Media and Society, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051211069055.Google Scholar
Nixon, R. (2011). Slow Violence and the Environmentalism of the Poor. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674061194Google Scholar
Nordqvist, P. (2011). “Dealing with sperm”: Comparing lesbians’ clinical and non-clinical donor conception processes. Sociology of Health & Illness, 33(1), 114–129. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9566.2010.01279.xGoogle Scholar
Nordqvist, P. (2014). The drive for openness in donor conception: Disclosure and the trouble with real life. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 28(3), 321–338. https://doi.org/10.1093/lawfam/ebu010Google Scholar
Nordqvist, P. (2017). Genetic thinking and everyday living: On family practices and family imaginaries. The Sociological Review, 65(4), 865–881. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038026117711645Google Scholar
Pearce, R. (2018). Trans temporalities and non-linear ageing. In King, A., Almack, K., Suen, Y.-T., & Westwood, S. (Eds.), Older Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Trans People: Minding the Knowledge Gaps (1st ed.). Routledge.Google Scholar
Power, J., Perlesz, A., Brown, R., Schofield, M., Pitts, M., McNair, R., & Bickerdike, A. (2010). Diversity, tradition and family: Australian same-sex attracted parents and their families. Gay and Lesbian Issues and Psychology Review, 6(2), 66.Google Scholar
Ribbens McCarthy, J. (2012). The powerful relational language of “family”: Togetherness, belonging and personhood. The Sociological Review, 60(1), 68–90. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.2011.02045.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riggs, D. W. (2008). Lesbian mothers, gay sperm donors, and community: Ensuring the well-being of children and families. Health Sociology Review, 17(3), 226–234.Google Scholar
Rodino, I. S., Burton, P. J., & Sanders, K. A. (2011). Donor information considered important to donors, recipients and offspring: An Australian perspective. Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 22(3), 303–311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2010.11.007Google Scholar
Rowland, R. (1985). The social and psychological consequences of secrecy in artificial insemination by donor (AID) programmes. Social Science & Medicine, 21(4), 391–396. https://doi.org/10.1016/0277-9536(85)90219-9Google Scholar
Scheib, J. E., Ruby, A., & Benward, J. (2017). Who requests their sperm donor’s identity? The first ten years of information releases to adults with open-identity donors. Fertility and Sterility, 107(2), 483–493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.10.023Google Scholar
Scott, S. (2018). A sociology of nothing: Understanding the unmarked. Sociology, 52(1), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038517690681Google Scholar
Smith, A. K., Persson, A., Drysdale, K., Bryant, J., Valentine, K., Wallace, J., Hamilton, M., Gray, R. M., & Newman, C. E. (2021). Family imaginaries in the disclosure of a blood‐borne virus. Sociology of Health & Illness. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.13316Google Scholar
Swanson, K. W. (2012). Adultery by doctor: Artificial insemination, 1890–1945. Chicago-Kent Law Review, 87(2), 44.Google Scholar
References
Adair, V., & Rogan, C. (1998). Infertility and parenting: The story so far. In Adair, V. & Dixon, R. (Eds.), The Family in Aotearoa/New Zealand (pp. 260–283). Auckland: Addison Wesley Longman.Google Scholar
Baker, M. (2005). Medically assisted conception: Revolutionizing family or perpetuating a nuclear and gendered model? Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 36(4), 521–543. https://doi.org/10.3138/jcfs.36.4.521Google Scholar
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2013). Successful Qualitative Research: A Practical Guide for Beginners. Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
Coney, S., & Else, A. (1999). Protecting Our Future: The Case for Greater Regulation of Assisted Reproductive Technology. Auckland: Women’s Health Action Trust.Google Scholar
Cram, F., & Pitama, S. (1998). Ko tōku whānau, ko tōku mana. In Adair, V. & Dixon, R. (Eds.), The Family in Aotearoa/New Zealand (pp. 130–157). Auckland: Addison Wesley Longman.Google Scholar
Daniels, K. (2007). Donor gametes: Anonymous or identified? Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 21(1), 113–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2006.09.010Google Scholar
Daniels, K., & Douglass, A. (2008). Access to genetic information by donor offspring and donors: Medicine, policy and law in New Zealand. Medicine and Law, 27, 131–146.Google Scholar
Daniels, K., & Lewis, G. M. (1996). Openness of information in the use of donor gametes: Developments in New Zealand. Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology, 14(1), 57–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/02646839608405859Google Scholar
Daniels, K. R., Kramer, W., & Perez-y-Perez, M. V. (2012). Semen donors who are open to contact with their offspring: Issues and implications for them and their families. Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 25, 670–677. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2012.09.009CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Durie, M. (2008). Bioethics in research: The ethics of indigeneity. Paper presented at the Ninth Global Forum on Bioethics in Research. http://gfbr9.hrc.govt.nz/articleGoogle Scholar
Durie-Hall, D., & Metge, J. (1992). Kua Tutū Te Puehu, Kia Mau: Maori aspirations and family law. In Heneghan, M. & Atkin, B. (Eds.), Family Law Policy in New Zealand (pp. 54–82). Auckland: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, J., & Irwin, R. (2002). Oocyte Recipients and Donors: Choosing a Relationship, Auckland, New Zealand: Fertility Associates. Unpublished paper.Google Scholar
Foaese, A. (2017). Pasifika Women’s Experiences of Infertility in Canterbury and Wellington [Unpublished master’s thesis]. University of Otago.Google Scholar
Gibson, H. (2021). Kin-making in the Reproductive Penumbra: Surrogacy in Aotearoa New Zealand [Unpublished doctoral thesis]. Te Herenga Waka/Victoria University of Wellington.Google Scholar
Glover, M., & Rousseau, B. (2007). ‘Your child is your whakapapa’: Māori considerations of assisted human reproduction and relatedness. SITES: New Series, 4(2), 117–136. https://doi.org/10.11157/sites-vol4iss2id76Google Scholar
Glover, M. (2008). Māori Attitudes to Assisted Human Reproduction: An Exploratory Study. Auckland: University of Auckland, Department of Social & Community Health.Google Scholar
Glover, M., McKree, A., & Dyall, L. (2009). Assisted reproduction: Issues for Takatāpui (New Zealand Indigenous non-heterosexuals). Journal of GLBT Family Studies, 5(4), 295–311. https://doi.org/10.1080/15504280903263702Google Scholar
Hargreaves, K., & Daniels, K. (2007). Parents’ dilemmas in sharing donor insemination conception stories with their children. Children & Society, 21, 420–431. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1099-0860.2006.00079.xGoogle Scholar
Hertz, R., Nelson, M. K., & Kramer, W. (2015). Sperm donors describe the experience of contact with their donor-conceived offspring. Facts, Views & Vision in ObGyn, 7(2), 91–100.Google Scholar
Kerekere, E. (2017). Part of the Whānau: The Emergence of Takatāpui Identity – He Whāriki Takatāpui [Unpublished doctoral thesis]. Victoria University of Wellington.Google Scholar
Lovelock, K. (2010). Conceiving reproduction: New reproductive technologies and the redefinition of kinship narrative in New Zealand society. Anthropological Forum, 20(2), 125–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/00664677.2010.487296Google Scholar
MacManus, J. (2017). Meet the couple who tried to get sperm on Reddit. https://thespinoff.co.nz/parenting/17-10-2017/meet-the-couple-who-tried-to-get-sperm-on-reddit/ (accessed 20 September 2021).Google Scholar
Marriot, L., & Sim, D. (2015). Indicators of inequality for Māori and Pacific people. Journal of New Zealand Studies, 20, 24–50.Google Scholar
Mason, J. (2008). Tangible affinities and real-life fascination of kinship. Sociology, 42(1), 29–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038507084824Google Scholar
McRae, K. O., & Nikora, L. W. (2006) Whāngai: Remembering, understanding and experiencing. MAI Review, 1, 1–18.Google Scholar
National Women’s Health. (2021). Public funding. National Women’s Health https://nationalwomenshealth.adhb.govt.nz/our-services/fertility/public-funding/ (accessed 19 October 2021).Google Scholar
Nordqvist, P. (2014). Bringing kinship into being: Connectedness, donor conception and lesbian parenthood. Sociology, 48(2), 268–283. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038513477936Google Scholar
Nordqvist, P. (2019). Kinship: How being related matters in personal life. In V. May, V. & Nordqvist, P. (Eds.), Sociology of Personal Life (2nd ed., pp 46–59). London: Red Globe Press.Google Scholar
Nordqvist, P. (2019a). Un/familiar connections: On the relevance of a sociology of personal life for exploring egg and sperm donation. Sociology of Health & Illness, 41(3), 601–615. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.12862Google Scholar
Nordqvist, P., & Smart, C. (2014). Relative Strangers: Family Life, Genes and Donor Conception. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
O’Neill, K., Hamer, H. P., & Dixon, R. (2012). ‘A lesbian family in a straight world’: The impact of the transition to parenthood on couple relationships in planned lesbian families. Women’s Studies Journal, 26(2), 39–53.Google Scholar
Pihama, L. (2012). Experiences of Whānau Māori within fertility clinics. In Reynolds, P. & Smith, C. (Eds.), The Gift of Children: Māori and Infertility (pp. 203–234). Wellington: Huia Publishers.Google Scholar
Pūtaiora Writing Group. (2010). Te Ara Tika: Guidelines for Māori Research Ethics: A Framework for Researchers and Ethics Committee Members. Auckland: Health Research Council of New Zealand.Google Scholar
Reynolds, P., & Smith, C. (2012). Introduction: He Kākano: Māori and assisted reproductive technologies. In Reynolds, P. & Smith, C. (Eds.), The Gift of Children: Māori and Infertility (pp. xiii–xix). Wellington: Huia Publishers.Google Scholar
Righarts, A., Dickson, N. P., Ekeroma, A., Gray, A. R., Parkin, L., & Gillett, W. R. (2021). The burden of infertility in New Zealand: A baseline survey of prevalence and service use. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 61, 439–447. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.13323Google Scholar
Salmond, A. (2012). Ontological quarrels: Indigeneity, exclusion and citizenship in a relational world. Anthropological Theory, 12(2), 115–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/1463499612454119Google Scholar
Shaw, R. M. (2020). Should surrogate pregnancy arrangements be enforceable in Aotearoa New Zealand? Policy Quarterly, 16(1), 18–25. https://doi.org/10.26686/pq.v16i1.6351Google Scholar
Shaw, R. (2007). The gift-exchange and reciprocity of women in donor-assisted conception. The Sociological Review, 55(2), 293–310. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.2007.00706.xGoogle Scholar
Shaw, R. M., & Fehoko, E. (2022). Epistemic injustice and Body Mass Index: Examining Māori and Pacific women’s access to fertility treatment in Aotearoa New Zealand. Fat Studies. Online first. https://doi:10.1080/21604851.2022.2063507Google Scholar
Smith, C. (2012). Tamaiti Whāngai and fertility. In Reynolds, P. & Smith, C. (Eds.), The Gift of Children: Māori and Infertility (pp. 143–202). Wellington: Huia Publishers.Google Scholar
Surtees, N. (2017). Narrating Connections and Boundaries: Constructing Relatedness in Lesbian Known Donor Familial Configurations [Unpublished doctoral thesis]. University of Canterbury.Google Scholar
Te Aka Matua o te Ture/Law Commission (2021). Te Kōpū Whāngai: He Arotake: Review of Surrogacy. Wellington: NZLC.Google Scholar
Waldby, C. (2019). The Oocyte Economy; The Changing Meaning of Human Eggs. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
References
Barnes, L. W. (2014). Conceiving Masculinity: Male Infertility, Medicine, and Identity. Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Bartholomaeus, C., & Riggs, D. W. (2020). Transgender and non-binary Australians’ experiences with healthcare professionals in relation to fertility preservation. Culture, Health & Sexuality, 22(2), 129–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691058.2019.1580388Google Scholar
Blumer, M. L., Ansara, Y. G., & Watson, C. M. (2013). Cisgenderism in family therapy: How everyday clinical practices can delegitimize people’s gender self-designations. Journal of Family Psychotherapy, 24(4), 267–285. https://doi.org/10.1080/08975353.2013.849551Google Scholar
Bonan, S., Chapel‐Lardic, E., Rosenblum, O., Dudkiewicz‐Sibony, C., Chamouard, L., Wolf, J. P., … & Drouineaud, V. (2021). Characteristics and intentions of heterosexual couples comprising a transgender man awaiting sperm donation to conceive a child. Andrology, 9(6), 1799–1807. https://doi-org/10.1111/andr.13103Google Scholar
Califia, P. (2000, 20 June). Family values. The Village Voice. Retrieved from www.villagevoice.com/2000/06/20/family-values/Google Scholar
Charter, R., Ussher, J. M., Perz, J., & Robinson, K. (2018). The transgender parent: Experiences and constructions of pregnancy and parenthood for transgender men in Australia. International Journal of Transgenderism, 19(1), 64–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/15532739.2017.1399496Google Scholar
Dempsey, D., Nordqvist, P., & Kelly, F. (2021). Beyond secrecy and openness: Telling a relational story about children’s best interests in donor-conceived families. BioSocieties, 17(1), 527–548. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41292-021-00225-9Google Scholar
Epstein, R. (2018). Space invaders: Queer and trans bodies in fertility clinics. Sexualities, 21(7), 1039–1058. https://doi.org/10.1177/1363460717720365Google Scholar
Gill, R., Henwood, K., & McLean, C. (2005). Body projects and the regulation of normative masculinity. Body & Society, 11(1), 37–62. https://doi.org/10.1177/1357034X05049849Google Scholar
Goedeke, S., & Payne, D. (2010). A qualitative study of New Zealand fertility counsellors’ roles and practices regarding embryo donation. Human Reproduction, 25(11), 2821–2828. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deq233Google Scholar
James-Abra, S., Tarasoff, L. A., Green, D., Epstein, R., Anderson, S., Marvel, S., … & Ross, L. E. (2015). Trans people’s experiences with assisted reproduction services: A qualitative study. Human Reproduction, 30(6), 1365–1374. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dev087Google Scholar
Lampe, N. M., Carter, S. K., & Sumerau, J. E. (2019). Continuity and change in gender frames: The case of transgender reproduction. Gender & Society, 33(6), 865–887. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243219857979Google Scholar
Lothstein, L. M. (1988). Female-to-male transsexuals who have delivered and reared their children. Annals of Sex Research, 1(1), 151–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, L. J. (2008). Sperm Counts: Overcome by Man’s Most Precious Fluid. New York University Press.Google Scholar
Nordqvist, P. (2021). Telling reproductive stories: Social scripts, relationality and donor conception. Sociology, 55(4), 677–695. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038520981860Google Scholar
Pearce, R., & White, F. R. (2019). Beyond the pregnant man: Representing trans pregnancy in A Deal With The Universe. Feminist Media Studies, 19(5), 764–767. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2019.1630925Google Scholar
Riggs, D.W. (2013). Transgender men’s self-representations of bearing children post-transition. In Green, F. & Friedman, M. (Eds.), Chasing Rainbows: Exploring Gender Fluid Parenting Practices (pp. 62–71). Demeter Press.Google Scholar
Riggs, D.W. (2014). What makes a man? Thomas Beattie, embodiment, and ‘mundane transphobia’. Feminism and Psychology, 24, 157–171. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959353514526221Google Scholar
Riggs, D.W., Pearce, R., Pfeffer, C.A., Hines, S., Ray White, F., & Ruspini, E. (2020). Men, trans/masculine, and non-binary people’s experiences of pregnancy loss: An international qualitative study. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-020-03166-6Google Scholar
Riggs, D. W., Pfeffer, C. A., Pearce, R., Hines, S., & White, F. R. (2021). Men, trans/masculine, and non-binary people negotiating conception: normative resistance and inventive pragmatism. International Journal of Transgender Health, 22(1–2), 6–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/15532739.2020.1808554Google Scholar
Von Doussa, H., Beauchamp, J., Goldner, S., & Zipper, B. (2021). Reflections and (un) learnings on supporting transgender and gender diverse people and their families in a mental health family service new to this work. Psychotherapy and Counselling Journal of Australia, 8(2). https://pacja.org.au/2020/12/reflections-and-unlearnings-on-supporting-transgender-and-gender-diverse-people-and-their-families-in-a-mental-health-family-service-new-to-this-work-2/Google Scholar
Wallace, J. (2010). The manly art of pregnancy. In Bornstein, K. & Bergman, S. Bear (Eds.), Gender Outlaws: The Next Generation (pp. 188–94). Seal Press.Google Scholar
Weston, K. (1997). Families We Choose: Lesbians, Gays, Kinship. Columbia University Press.Google Scholar