نبذة مختصرة : Understanding the ethical concerns of paid and altruistic surrogacy requires knowledge of reproductive freedom and procreative autonomy. An accurate approach must be sensitive to the nature of sexual oppression, specifically in its influence on women’s choices, self-identity, and personal relationships. The aim of this essay is to defend the relevance of radical feminism in questioning reproductive liberalism, which often focuses more on the interests of the intended parents. Keeping in mind what egalitarian philosophers have proposed from a social-relational autonomy perspective to allow surrogacy contracts under certain circumstances -specifically, they suggest that legalization could be compatible with women’s reproductive autonomy if it is done altruistically with protective measures and support for the surrogate’s revocation of consent - I uphold that radical feminists properly make clear how oppression remains in the cultural environment that endorses surrogacy contracts. A macroscopic methodology, based on American philosopher Marilyn Frye’s metaphor of the caged bird, is a helpful tool to comprehend why surrogacy contracts do not enhance women’s reproductive autonomy, even if they enable some surrogate mothers to earn enough income to cope with economic pressures. ; Comprender los dilemas éticos en torno a la subrogación de útero exige un conocimiento preciso de los conceptos de libertad y autonomía reproductiva. Una aproximación pertinente debe reconocer la naturaleza de la opresión sexual, sobre todo de cómo influye en la autonomía de las mujeres, en sus elecciones, en la identidad propia y en las relaciones interpersonales. El objetivo de este ensayo es defender la relevancia de las críticas del feminismo radical a las corrientes liberales progresistas, que a menudo prestan mayor atención a los intereses de los denominados padres intencionales. Considerando lo que varias filósofas igualitaristas han expuesto desde una perspectiva socio-relacional de la autonomía para permitir la subrogación bajo ...
Relation: https://arbor.revistas.csic.es/index.php/arbor/article/view/2452/3733; https://arbor.revistas.csic.es/index.php/arbor/article/view/2452/3734; https://arbor.revistas.csic.es/index.php/arbor/article/view/2452/3735; Álvarez-Medina, Silvina (2017). La autonomía reproductiva, relaciones de género, filiación y justicia. Revista jurídica de la Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, 35: 145-170. Disponible en https://revistas.uam.es/revistajuridica/article/view/8902; Alghrani, Amel y Harris, John (2006). Reproductive liberty: Should the foundation of families be regulated? Child and family law quarterly, 18 (2): 191-210.; Amorós, Celia (1987). Espacio de los iguales, espacio de las idénticas. Notas sobre poder y principio de individuación. Arbor: ciencia, pensamiento y cultura. 128 (503): 113-127.; Anderson, Elizabeth (1995). Value in ethics and economics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.; Anderson, Scott (2002). Prostitution and sexual autonomy: Making sense of the prohibition of prostitution. Ethics, 112 (4): 748-767. https://doi.org/10.1086/339672; Arneson, Richard (1992). Commodification and commercial surrogacy. Philosophy and public affairs, 21 (2): 132-164. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2265230; Beltrán, Elena (2017). Mi cuerpo, ¿de quién es? Propiedad y derechos sobre el cuerpo humano. Revista jurídica de la Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, 35 (1): 197-211.; Berkhout, Suze (2008). Buns in the oven. Objectification, surrogacy, and women's autonomy. Social theory and practice, 34 (1): 95-117. https://doi.org/10.5840/soctheorpract20083415; Casado, María y Navarro-Michel, Mónica (2019). Documento sobre gestación por sustitución. Barcelona: Edicions Universitat de Barcelona.; De Lora, Pablo (2019). Lo sexual es político (y jurídico). Madrid: Alianza Editorial.; Dickenson, Donna (2017). Property in the body. Feminist perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316675984; Dworkin, Andrea (1985). Right-wing women. Nueva York: Perigree Books.; Dworkin, Gerald (1972). Paternalism. The monist, 56 (1): 64-84. https://doi.org/10.5840/monist197256119; Dworkin, Ronald (1993). Life's dominion. Nueva York: Vintage; Evans, David (productor) (sin director asignado) (1991). Against pornography: The feminism of Andrea Dworkin. Reino Unido. British Broadcasting Corporation- Films Media Group. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9j7-zZks08&ab_channel=RobertJensen.; Fabre, Cécile (2006). Whose body is it anyway? Justice and the integrity of the person. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/0199289999.001.0001; Field, Martha (1990). The case against the enforcement of surrogacy contracts. Politics and the life sciences, 8 (2): 199-204. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0730938400009746 PMid:11650311; Frye, Marilyn (1983). The politics of reality. Essays in feminist theory. Berkeley: The Crossing Press.; Hanisch, Carol (1969/2000). The personal is political. En: Crow, Barbara (ed.) Radical feminism: A documentary reader. Nueva York y Londres: New York University Press, pp. 113-116.; Hanmer, Jalna (1987). Transforming consciousness: Women and the new reproductive technologies. En: Raymond, Janice y Corea, Gena; et. al. (eds.) Man-made women: How new reproductive technologies affect women. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, pp. 88-109.; Harris, John (2001). The value of life: An introduction to medical ethics. Londres: Routledge.; Lamm, Eleonora (2013). Gestación por sustitución: Ni maternidad subrogada ni alquiler de vientres. Barcelona: Edicions Universitat de Barcelona.; Leidholdt, Dorchen y Raymond, Janice (1990). The sexual liberals and the attack on feminism. Nueva York: Teachers College Press; Lerner, Gerda (1986). The creation of patriarchy. Nueva York: Oxford University Press; Lerner, Gerda (1993). The creation of feminist conciousness. From the middle ages to eighteen-seventy. Nueva York: Oxford University Press.; Lorde, Audre (1984/2007). Sister outsider. Berkeley: The crossing press.; MacKinnon, Catharine (1989). Toward a feminist theory of the state. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.; MacKinnon, Catharine (1990). Liberalism and the death of feminism. En: Leidholdt, Dorchen y Raymond, Janice (eds.) The sexual liberals and the attack on feminism. Nueva York: Teachers College Press, pp. 3-13.; Nussbaum, Martha (1999). Sex and social justice. Nueva York: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195112108.001.0001; Olavarría, María Elena (2018). Personas que gestan para otros. Etnografía del trabajo reproductivo en México. Revista iberoamericana de antropología, 14 (3): 417-440. https://doi.org/10.11156/aibr.140304; Oshana, Marina (1998). Personal autonomy and society. Journal of social philosophy, 29 (1): 81-102. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9833.1998.tb00098.x; Panitch, Vida (2013). Surrogate tourism and reproductive rights. En: Hypatia, 28 (2): 274-289. https://doi.org/10.1111/hypa.12005; Pateman, Carole (1988). The sexual contract. Londres: Polity Press; Pateman, Carole (1989). The disorder of women. Democracy, feminism and political theory. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.; Pateman, Carole (2002). Self-ownership and property in the person. Democratization and a tale of two concepts. The journal of political philosophy. 10 (1): 20-53. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9760.00141; Patrone, Tatiana (2018). Is paid surrogacy a form of reproductive prostitution? A kantian perspective. Cambridge quarterly of healthcare ethics, 27 (1): 109-122. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0963180117000445 PMid:29214965; Phillips, Anne (2013). Our bodies, whose property? Princeton, EEUU: Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.23943/princeton/9780691150864.001.0001; Ragoné, Helena (1997). Chasing the blood tie. Surrogate mothers, adoptive mothers, and fathers. En: Lamphere, Louise; Ragoné, Helena; Zavella, Patricia. (eds.) Situated lives. Gender and culture in everyday life. Nueva York y Londres: Routledge, pp. 110-127.; Raymond, Janice (1990a). Sexual and reproductive liberalism. En: Leidholdt, Dorchen y Raymond, Janice (eds.) The sexual liberals and the attack on feminism. Nueva York: Teachers College Press, pp. 104-111.; Raymond, Janice (1990b). Reproductive gifts and gift giving: the altruistic woman. The Hastings center report, 20 (6): 7-11. https://doi.org/10.2307/3563416 PMid:2283292; Raymond, Janice (1995). Women as wombs: Reproductive technologies and the battle over women's freedom. Melbourne: Spinifex Press.; Rich, Adrienne (1980). Compulsory heterosexuality and lesbian existance. Signs: journal of women in culture and society, 5 (4): 631-660. https://doi.org/10.1086/493756; Robertson, John (1994). Children of choice: Freedom and the new reproductive technologies. Princeton: Princeton University Press.; Robertson, John (1995). Liberalism and the limits of procreative liberty: A response to my critics. Washington and lee law review, 52 (1): 233-267.; Robertson, John (2004). Gay and lesbian access to assisted reproductive technology. Case western reserve law review, 55 (2): 323-372.; Robertson, John (2016). Other women's wombs: Uterus transplants and gestational surrogacy. Journal of law and the biosciences, 3 (1): 68-86. https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsw011 PMid:27774233 PMCid:PMC5033439; Satz, Debra (2010). Why some things should not be for sale. The moral limits of markets. Nueva York: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195311594.001.0001; Shalev, Carmel (1989). Birth power. The case for surrogacy. New Haven: Yale University Press.; Shanley, Mary Lyndon (1993). «Surrogate mothering» and women's freedom: A critique of contracts for human reproduction. Signs: Journal of women in culture and society, 18 (3): 618-639. https://doi.org/10.1086/494822 PMid:11659996; Shanley, Mary Lyndon (2002). Making babies, making families. Boston: Beacon Press.; Smietana, Marcin (2017). Affective de-commodifying, economic de-kinning: Surrogates' and gay fathers' narratives in U.S. Surrogacy. Sociological research online, 22 (2): 1-13. https://doi.org/10.5153/sro.4312; Straehle, Christine (2015). Is there a right to surrogacy? Journal of applied philosophy, 33 (2): 146-159. https://doi.org/10.1111/japp.12145; Torres-Quiroga, Miguel Ángel (2019). Maternidad y gestación en venta: Fabricar bebés en la era neoliberal. Barcelona: Edicions Universitat de Barcelona.; Valcárcel, Amelia (2017). La agenda sobrevenida del feminismo. El País, 12 de junio. Disponible en https://elpais.com/elpais/2017/05/25/opinion/1495703140_313473.html; Wertheimer, Alan (1992). Two questions about surrogacy and exploitation. En: Philosophy and public affairs, 21 (3), pp. 211-239.; Wilkinson, Stephen (2003). The exploitation argument against commercial surrogacy. Bioethics. 17 (2):169-187. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8519.00331 PMid:12812183; Wilkinson, Stephen (2016). Exploitation in paid surrogacy arrangements. Journal of applied philosophy, 33 (2): 125-145. https://doi.org/10.1111/japp.12138 PMid:27471338 PMCid:PMC4946802; Young, Iris Marion (1990). Justice and the politics of difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press.; https://arbor.revistas.csic.es/index.php/arbor/article/view/2452
Processing Request
No Comments.