Author(s)

Li Peijia ¹

Affiliation(s)

¹ Queen Mary University of London (Queen Mary University of London), London, E1 4NS, UK

Corresponding Author

Li Peijia

ABSTRACT

This essay focuses on why women's right to control their bodies has been restricted from an ethical perspective in the international trade in ova and surrogacy. Commercial surrogacy and the international trade in ova mean that women are being commodified. This reflects the exploitative nature of capital over women who are surrogates or ova donors. The exploitation is mainly manifested in the enormous risks faced by women, and the contracts are not very comprehensive in terms of upholding the rights of surrogate mothers and women who donate their ova for payment. On the contrary, many surrogacy contracts with women in poor areas minimise the rights of the surrogate mother. Many women in poorer areas do not volunteer to become surrogates but are forced to do so by family pressure. Surrogate mothers are also emotionally exploited, i.e. they are constantly reminded not to become too emotionally attached to the embryo.

KEYWORDS

Women's autonomy, Surrogacy, Commercial surrogacy, International trade in ova, Exploitation, Ethical, Human Right

CITE THIS PAPER

Li Peijia, Limits on women's autonomy in controlling their reproductive rights: an analysis of paid ova donation and commercial surrogacy. Philosophy Journal (2024) Vol. 3: 28-33. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.23977/phij.2024.030105.

REFERENCES

[1] Anderson, Elizabeth (1993) 'Value in ethics and economics.' Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
[2] A.Pande(2010) 'Commercial Surrogacy in India: manufacturing the perfect 'mother worker' ', Signs: journal of women, culture and society 35(4):969-992
[3] Charlotte Halmo Krolokke and Saumya Pant (2012) 'I only need her uterus': Neo-liberal Discourses on Transnational surrogacy, NORA- Nordic Journal of Feminist and Gender Research, 20:4, 233 – 248. Available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08038740.2012.729535?needAccess=true&journalCode=swom20 [Accessed 3 January 2023 ]
[4] Donna Dickenson and Britta van Beers (2020) 'Surrogacy: New Challengers to Law and Ethics', The New Bioethics, 26:24 293-297
[5] Jessica L. Peet (2016) 'A Womb that is (Not Always) One's own', International Feminist hournal of Politics, 18:2, 171-189.
[6] Marcin Seietana, Sharmila Rudrappa and Christina Weis(2021) 'Moral frameworks of Commercial Surrogacy within the US,India and Russia' Sexual and Reproductive Health Matters, 29:1, 377-393
[7] Monique Deveaux (2016) 'Exploitations, structural injustice and the cross-border trade in human ova', Journal of Global Ethics 12(1):48-68.
[8] Smerdon, Usha Rengachary. (2008) 'Crossing bodies, crossing borders: International surrogacy between the united states and India'. Cumberland Law Review 39(1): 15-85
[9] S. T. Khader (2013) 'Intersectionality and the ethics of transnational commercial surrogacy', International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 6 (1): 68-90.
[10] V. Panitch(2013) 'Global Surrogacy: Exploitation to Empowerment', Journal of Global Ethics, 9:3, 329-343
[11] V. Panitch (2013) 'Surrogate Tourism and Reproductive Right', Hypatina 28(2) 274-289. 

Sponsors, Associates, and Links

---

• Journal of Language Testing & Assessment
  
  
• Information and Knowledge Management
  
  
• Military and Armament Science
  
  
• Media and Communication Research
  
  
• Journal of Human Movement Science
  
  
• Art and Performance Letters
  
  
• Lecture Notes on History
  
  
• Lecture Notes on Language and Literature
  
  
• Science of Law Journal
  
  
• Journal of Political Science Research
  
  
• Journal of Sociology and Ethnology
  
  
• Advances in Broadcasting