15
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Failed surrogate conceptions: social and ethical aspects of preconception disruptions during commercial surrogacy in India

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          During a commercial surrogacy arrangement, the event of embryo transfer can be seen as the formal starting point of the arrangement. However, it is common for surrogates to undergo a failed attempt at pregnancy conception or missed conception after an embryo transfer. This paper attempts to argue that such failed attempts can be understood as a loss. It aims to reconstruct the experiences of loss and grief of the surrogates and the intended parents as a consequence of their collective failure to conceive a surrogate pregnancy.

          Methods

          Drawing on a qualitative study conducted over a period of eight months between 2014 and 2015 at two fertility clinics in Delhi and two in Kolkata, India, this paper examines the experiences of the surrogates and the intended parents when faced with missed conceptions or failed conceptions during a surrogacy arrangement.

          Results

          We argue that while the surrogate grieves the non-arrival of a ‘good news’ as an uncertain loss, the intended parents experience yet another, failure in addition to the losses they might have incurred during their previous fertility treatments. The body of the surrogate becomes a site of ‘a lost opportunity’. The surrogate embodies a loss in her quest to achieve social mobility and the intended parents experience a disembodied pregnancy loss. This very emotional experience stands in stark contrast to the conceptualisation of such failed attempts as non-events within the discourse of the surrogacy industry. The experience of loss of the intended parents is recognised but their grief is given no space. We argue that such ambiguity around the nature of losses resulting out of a missed or failed conception during surrogacy is an outcome of lack of interpersonal relationship between the surrogate and the intended parents.

          Conclusions

          Since commercial surrogacy is a relational process, the only way in which the experiences of losses and failures of the actors at the preconception stage can be better addressed is through developing close sharing and understanding between each other through an ethics of care. Therefore, to nurture caring relationships, surrogacy needs to be understood as a moral commitment by –the surrogates and intended parents. To enable such a commitment, there is a need to reconsider the pre-defined and legally regulated professional duty of the doctors, agents and agencies. It cannot be a one-sided commitment, but has to have elements of mutuality.

          Related collections

          Most cited references46

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Infertility and psychological distress: a critical review of the literature.

          This essay reviews the literature on the social psychological impact of infertility, paying special attention to the relationship between gender and the infertility experience. It is convenient to divide the literature into articles which explore the possibility that infertility may have psychological causes (Psychogenic Hypothesis) and those which examine the psychological consequences of infertility (Psychological Consequences Hypothesis). The psychogenic hypothesis is now rejected by most researchers, but a related hypothesis, which states that stress may be a causal factor in infertility, is worthy of exploration. The descriptive literature on the psychological consequences of infertility presents infertility as a devastating experience, especially for women. Attempts to test the psychological consequences hypothesis have produced more equivocal results. In general, studies which look for psychopathology have not found significant differences between the infertile and others. Studies which employ measures of stress and self-esteem have found significant differences. The psychological consequences literature is characterized by a number of flaws, including over sampling of women, small sample size, non-representative samples, failure to study those who have not sought treatment, primitive statistical techniques, and an over-reliance on self-reports. Studies on infertility and psychological distress need to take into consideration both the duration of infertility and the duration of treatment. Finding an appropriate set of "controls" is a particularly intractable problem for this area of research. In general, the psychological distress literature shows little regard for the social construction of infertility. By taking what should be understood as a characteristic of a social situation and transforming it into an individual trait, the literature presents what is essentially a medical model of the psycho-social impact of infertility. Most researchers conclude that infertility is a more stressful experience for women than it is for men. Most studies have found that the relationship between gender and infertility distress is not affected by which partner has the reproductive impairment. Future research needs to be better informed by theoretical considerations. Scholars need to pay more attention to the way the experience of infertility is conditioned by social structural realities. New ways need to be developed for better taking into account the processual nature of the infertility experience. Efforts need to be make to include under-studied portions of the infertile population. Finally, more effort needs to be made to better integrate the empirical study of the experience of infertility with important social policy questions.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Ambiguous Loss Theory: Challenges for Scholars and Practitioners

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Book: not found

              The Elusive EmbryoHow Women and Men Approach New Reproductive Technologies

              Gay Becker (2000)
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                0049 551 394186 , sayani.mitra@medizin.uni-goettingen.de
                silke.schicktanz@medizin.uni-goettingen.de
                Journal
                Philos Ethics Humanit Med
                Philos Ethics Humanit Med
                Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine : PEHM
                BioMed Central (London )
                1747-5341
                19 September 2016
                19 September 2016
                2016
                : 11
                : 9
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine, University Medical Center Göttingen, Humboldtallee 36, Göttingen, 37073 Germany
                [2 ]Göttingen Centre for Gender Studies, Humboldtallee 36, Göttingen, 37073 Germany
                Article
                40
                10.1186/s13010-016-0040-6
                5075174
                27769311
                6ca5cabf-c426-4d84-86a8-a24dd7356fce
                © The Author(s). 2016

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 19 February 2016
                : 30 August 2016
                Funding
                Funded by: German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD)
                Award ID: 91541200(personal reference number)
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: DAAD-UGC India-Germany Joint Research Collaboration 2014
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2016

                Philosophy of science
                commercial surrogacy,missed/failed conceptions,preconception disruptions,loss,care ethics,india

                Comments

                Comment on this article