Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Introduction: Kinds of Children

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Selective Reproduction in the 21st Century

Abstract

This introductory chapter provides a definition of selective reproduction, outlining the commonalities and differences between assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs) and selective reproductive technologies (SRTs). The chapter offers an overview of the major forms of selective reproduction in the twenty-first century, describing their objectives, types and scopes. As a guideline for empirical studies of the global routinization of SRTs, the chapter identifies four routes of routinization: techniques, sites, people and regulations. Finally, the chapter tracks the economic and political forces underpinning the routinization of SRTs and discusses the critiques that new technologies for selective reproduction have been met with.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Almeling, R. 2009. Gender and the Value of Bodily Goods: Commodification in Egg and Sperm Donation. Law and Contemporary Problems 72(3): 37–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, Gay. 2000. The Elusive Embryo: How Men and Women Approach New Reproductive Technologies. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bharadwaj, Aditya. 2016. Conceptions: Infertility and Procreative Technologies in India. New York: Berghahn Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, Lawrence. 2007. Operability, Bioavailability, and Exception. In Global Assemblages, ed. Aihwa Ong and Stephen J. Collier, 79–90. Malden: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Collier, Stephen J., and Aihwa Ong. 2007. Global Assemblages Anthropological Problems. In Global Assemblages, ed. Aihwa Ong and Stephen J. Collier, 3–21. Malden: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Deonandan, Raywat. 2015. Recent Trends in Reproductive Tourism and International Surrogacy: Ethical Considerations and Challenges for Policy. Risk Management and Healthcare Policy 8: 111–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dobson, R. 2003a. “Saviour Sibling” is Born After Embryo Selection in the United States. British Medical Journal 326 (7404): 1416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duster, T. 2003. Backdoor to Eugenics. New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, J., S. Franklin, E. Hirsch, F. Prices, and M. Strathern. 1993. Technologies of Procreation: Kinship in the Age of Assisted Conception. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, Jeanette, Sarah Franklin, Eric Hirsch, Frances Price, and Marilyn Strathern. 1999. Technologies of Procreation: Kinship in the Age of Assisted Conception. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erikson, S.L. 2003. Post-diagnostic Abortion in Germany: Reproduction Gone Awry, Again? Social Science & Medicine 56(9): 1987–2001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franklin, Sarah. 1997. Embodied Progress: A Cultural Account of Assisted Conception. London, New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franklin, Sarah, and Celia Roberts. 2006. Born and Made: An Ethnography of Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, F., and P. Riis. 1956. Antenatal Sex Determination. Nature 177: 330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gammeltoft, Tine M. 2014. Haunting Images: A Cultural Account of Selective Reproduction in Vietnam. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gammeltoft, Tine M., and T.T.H. Nguyen. 2007. Fetal Conditions and Fatal Decisions: Ethical Dilemmas in Ultrasound Screening in Vietnam. Social Science and Medicine 64: 2248–2259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gammeltoft, Tine M., and Ayo Wahlberg. 2014. Selective Reproductive Technologies. Annual Review of Anthropology 43 (1): 201–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenhalgh, Susan, and Edwin A. Winckler. 2005. Governing China’s Population: from Leninist to Neoliberal Biopolitics. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Handwerker, Lisa. 2002. The Politics of Making Modern Babies in China: Reproductive Technologies and the “New” Eugenics. In Infertility Around the Globe: New Thinking on Childlessness, Gender, and Reproductive Technologies, ed. Marcia Claire Inhorn and Frank van Balen, 298–314. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inhorn, Marcia C. 2003. Local Babies, Global Science: Gender, Religion and In Vitro Fertilization in Egypt. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2015. Cosmopolitan Conceptions: IVF Sojourns in Global Dubai. Durham: Duke University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Inhorn, Marcia C., and Zeynep B. Gürtin. 2011. Cross-Border Reproductive Care: A Future Research Agenda. Reproductive Biomedicine Online 23 (5): 665–676.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahn, Susan Martha. 2000. Reproducing Jews: A Cultural Account of Assisted Conception in Israel. Durham: Duke University Press Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khanna, S.K. 2010. Fetal/Fatal Knowledge: New Reproductive Technologies and Family-Building Strategies in India. Belmont: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koch, Lene. 2006. Eugenic Sterilisation in Scandinavia. The European Legacy 11 (3): 299–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koenig, Barbara A. 1988. The Technological Imperative in Medical Practice: The Social Creation of a ‘Routine’ Treatment. In Biomedicine Examined, ed. Margaret Lock and Deborah Gordon, 465–496. Culture, Illness and Healing 13. Netherlands: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohrman, Matthew. 2005. Bodies of Difference: Experiences of Disability and Institutional Advocacy in the Making of Modern China. Berkley: University of California Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Larkin, Brian. 2013. The Politics and Poetics of Infrastructure. Annual Review of Anthropology 42 (1): 327–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lippman, Abby. 1999. Embodied Knowledge and Making Sense of Prenatal Diagnosis. Journal of Genetic Counseling 8 (5): 255–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lock, M. 2007. Genomics, Laissez-Faire Eugenics, and Disability. In Disability in Local and Global Worlds, ed. B. Ingstad and S.R. Whyte, 189–211. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meskus, Mianna. 2009. Governing Risk Through Informed Choice: Prenatal Testing in Welfarist Maternity Care. In Contested Categories: Life Sciences in Society, ed. Susanne Bauer and Ayo Wahlberg. Farnham: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Microsort. 2013. What is MicroSort? Accessed 10 November 2013. http://www.microsort.com/?page_id=319

  • Nuffield Council. 2006. Critical care Decisions in Fetal and Neonatal Medicine: Ethical Issues. London: Nuffield Council on Bioethics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollock, A. 2003. Complicating Power in High-Tech Reproduction: Narratives of Anonymous Paid Egg Donors. Journal of Medical Humanities 24(3–4): 241–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rapp, Rayna. 1999. Testing Women, Testing the Fetus: The Social Impact of Amniocentesis in America. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rapp, Rayna. 2000. Testing Women, Testing the Fetus: The Social Impact of Amniocentesis in America. 1st ed. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothman, Barbara Katz. 1993. The Tentative Pregnancy: How Amniocentesis Changes the Experience of Motherhood. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saxton, Marsha. 1998. Disability Rights and Selective Abortion. In Abortion Wars: A Half Century of Struggle 1950–2000, ed. Rickie Solinger, 374–394. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwennesen, Nete, and Lene Koch. 2009. Calculating and Visualising Life: Matters of Fact in the Context of Prenatal Risk Assessment. In Contested Categories: Life Sciences in Society, ed. Susanne Bauer and Ayo Wahlberg, 69–87. Surrey: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwennesen, Nete, Lene Koch, and Mette Nordahl Svendsen. 2009. Practising Informed Choice: Decision-Making and Prenatal Risk Assessment—The Danish Experience. In Disclosure Dilemmas: Ethics of Genetic Prognosis After the ‘Right to Know/Not to Know’ Debate, ed. C. Rehmann-Sutter and H. Müller. Surrey: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shakespeare, Tom. 1998. Choices and Rights: Eugenics, Genetics, and Disability Equality. Disability and Society 13 (5): 665–681.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strathern, Marilyn. 1992. Reproducing the Future: Anthropology, Kinship, and the New Reproductive Technologies. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1998. Surrogates and Substitutes. In The Politics of Postmodernity, ed. James Good and Irving Velody. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Svendsen, Mette Nordahl. 2014. Selective Reproduction: Social and Temporal Imaginaries for Negotiating the Value of Life in Human and Animal Neonates. Medical Anthropology Quarterly 29 (2): 178–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taussig, Karen Sue, Rayna Rapp, and Deborah Heath. 2003. Flexible Eugenics: Technologies of Self in the Age of Genetics. In Genetic Nature/Culture: Anthropology and Science Beyond the Two-Culture Divide, ed. A.H. Goodman, D. Heath, and M.S. Lindee, 58–76. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, Charis. 2007. Making Parents: The Ontological Choreography of Reproductive Technologies. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wahlberg, Ayo. 2009. Serious Disease as Kinds of Living. In Contested Categories: Life Sciences in Society, ed. Susanne Bauer and Ayo Wahlberg, 89–112. Farnham: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2016. The Birth and Routinization of IVF in China. Reproductive Biomedicine and Society Online 2: 97–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhu, Jianfeng. 2013. Projecting Potentiality. Understanding Maternal Serum Screening in Contemporary China. Current Anthropology 54 (S7): S36–S44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Sources for Table 1.1

  • Almeling, R. 2011. Sex Cells: The Medical Market for Eggs and Sperm. Berkley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baruch, S., D. Kaufman, and K.L. Hudson. 2008. Genetic Testing of Embryos: Practices and Perspectives of US In Vitro Fertilization Clinics. Fertility and Sterility 89 (5): 1053–1058.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calhaz-Jorge, C., C. de Geyter, M.S. Kupka, J. de Mouzon, K. Erb, E. Mocanu, T. Motrenko, et al. 2016. Assisted Reproductive Technology in Europe, 2012: Results Generated from European Registers by ESHRE. Human Reproduction 31 (8): 1638–1652.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chandrasekharan, S., M.A. Minear, A. Hung, and M.A. Allyse. 2014. Noninvasive Prenatal Testing Goes Global. Science Translational Medicine 6 (231): 15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Graaf, G., F. Buckley, and B.G. Skotko. 2015. Estimates of the Live Births, Natural Losses, and Elective Terminations with Down Syndrome in the United States. American Journal of Medical Genetics Part A 167 (4): 756–767.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Rycke, M., F. Belva, V. Goossens, C. Moutou, S.B. SenGupta, J. Traeger-Synodinos, and E. Coonen. 2015. ESHRE PGD Consortium Data Collection XIII: Cycles from January to December 2010 with Pregnancy Follow-Up to October 2011. Human Reproduction 30 (8): 1763–1789.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Department of Health and National Statistics. 2008. Abortion Statistics, England and Wales: 2007. Statistical Bulletin 2008(1): 1–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobson, R. 2003b. “Saviour sibling” is Born After Embryo Selection in the United States. British Medical Journal 326 (7404): 1416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ekelund, C.K., O.B. Petersen, L. Skibsted, S. Kjærgaard, I. Vogel, and A. Tabor. 2011. First-Trimester Screening for Trisomy 21 in Denmark: Implications for Detection and Birth Rates of Trisomy 18 and Trisomy 13. Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology 38 (2): 140–144.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ginsburg, E.S., V.L. Baker, C. Racowsky, E. Wantman, J. Goldfarb, and J.E. Stern. 2011. Use of Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis and Preimplantation Genetic Screening in the United States: A Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Writing Group Paper. Fertility and Sterility 96 (4): 865–868.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Human Fertilisation & Embryology Authority. 2014. Egg and Sperm Donation in the UK: 2012–2013. London: HFEA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahraman, S., C. Beyazyurek, M.A. Yesilipek, G. Ozturk, M. Ertem, S. Anak, S. Kansoy, et al. 2014. Successful Haematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation in 44 Children from Healthy Siblings Conceived After Preimplantation HLA Matching. Reproductive Biomedicine Online 29 (3): 340–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karabinus, David S., Donald P. Marazzo, Harvey J. Stern, Daniel A. Potter, Chrispo I. Opanga, Marisa L. Cole, Lawrence A. Johnson, and Joseph D. Schulman. 2014. The Effectiveness of Flow Cytometric Sorting of Human Sperm (MicroSort®) for Influencing a Child’s Sex. Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology 12 (1): 1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, L.J. 2014. Reproductive Tourism in the United States. Hoboken: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sedgh, G., J. Bearak, S. Singh, A. Bankole, A. Popinchalk, B. Ganatra, C. Rossier, et al. 2016. Abortion Incidence Between 1990 and 2014: Global, Regional, and Subregional Levels and Trends. The Lancet 388 (10041): 258–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sedgh, G., S. Singh, and R. Hussain. 2014. Intended and Unintended Pregnancies Worldwide in 2012 and Recent Trends. Studies in Family Planning 45 (3): 301–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skotko, B.G. 2009. With New Prenatal Testing, Will Babies with Down Syndrome Slowly Disappear? Archives of Disease in Childhood 94 (11): 823–826.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun, H.Y., M.J. Gu, Y.Y. Sun, S.Q. Wang, Z.L. Liu, Z.X. Zhang, F.X. Lin, et al. 2013. Analysis of the Pregnancy Outcomes of 13 723 Tubes of Sperm Specimens from the Sperm Bank. Zhonghua nan ke xue= National Journal of Andrology 19 (9): 798–801.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNFPA. 2012. Sex Imbalances at Birth: Current Trends, Consequences and Policy Implications. New York: UNFPA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vassy, Carine. 2006. From a Genetic Innovation to Mass Health Programmes: The Diffusion of Down’s Syndrome Prenatal Screening and Diagnostic Techniques in France. Social Science and Medicine 63 (8): 2041–2051.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vassy, C., S. Rosman, and B. Rousseau. 2014. From Policy Making to Service Use. Down’s Syndrome Antenatal Screening in England, France and the Netherlands. Social Science and Medicine 106: 67–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vertommen, S. 2016. From the Pergonal Project to Kadimastem: A Genealogy of Israel’s Reproductive-Industrial Complex. BioSocieties. doi:10.1057/biosoc.2015.44

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Ayo Wahlberg & Tine M. Gammeltoft

Authors
  1. Ayo Wahlberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tine M. Gammeltoft
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Anthropology, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Ayo Wahlberg

  2. Department of Anthropology, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Tine M. Gammeltoft

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Wahlberg, A., Gammeltoft, T.M. (2018). Introduction: Kinds of Children. In: Wahlberg, A., Gammeltoft, T. (eds) Selective Reproduction in the 21st Century. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58220-7_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58220-7_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-58219-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-58220-7

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation