善良的灵魂?

Joshua Gamson
{"title":"善良的灵魂?","authors":"Joshua Gamson","doi":"10.1016/j.rbms.2018.04.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In this commentary, I reflect on the connections and strains between various efforts to expand options for family-making, to reduce the inequities that structure family-making through assisted reproduction and adoption, to secure and protect reproductive rights, and to pursue reproductive justice. I suggest that two threads connect these various aspects of reproductive politics: the commitment to self-determination, and an expanded understanding of kinship beyond the nuclear and the biological. These two themes stand in complicated tension – visible in debates over the ethics of surrogacy, for instance, and in the ways that queer family-making is facilitated, in part, by class and racial inequalities – that need to be confronted head-on. I conclude with some examples of what political kinship built around family justice can and does look like at the level of concrete action.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":37973,"journal":{"name":"Reproductive Biomedicine and Society Online","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.rbms.2018.04.002","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Kindred spirits?\",\"authors\":\"Joshua Gamson\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.rbms.2018.04.002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>In this commentary, I reflect on the connections and strains between various efforts to expand options for family-making, to reduce the inequities that structure family-making through assisted reproduction and adoption, to secure and protect reproductive rights, and to pursue reproductive justice. I suggest that two threads connect these various aspects of reproductive politics: the commitment to self-determination, and an expanded understanding of kinship beyond the nuclear and the biological. These two themes stand in complicated tension – visible in debates over the ethics of surrogacy, for instance, and in the ways that queer family-making is facilitated, in part, by class and racial inequalities – that need to be confronted head-on. I conclude with some examples of what political kinship built around family justice can and does look like at the level of concrete action.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":37973,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Reproductive Biomedicine and Society Online\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.rbms.2018.04.002\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Reproductive Biomedicine and Society Online\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S240566181830008X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reproductive Biomedicine and Society Online","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S240566181830008X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在这篇评论中,我反思了各种努力之间的联系和紧张关系,这些努力旨在扩大家庭生育的选择,通过辅助生殖和收养减少构成家庭生育的不公平现象,保障和保护生殖权利,以及追求生殖正义。我认为有两条线索将生殖政治的各个方面联系起来:对自决的承诺,以及对超越核和生物的亲属关系的更广泛理解。这两个主题处于复杂的紧张关系中——例如,在关于代孕伦理的辩论中,以及在一定程度上由阶级和种族不平等促进酷儿家庭形成的方式中,都可以看到这一点——需要直面。最后,我举了一些例子,说明围绕家庭正义建立的政治亲情在具体行动层面上可以而且确实是什么样子。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Kindred spirits?

In this commentary, I reflect on the connections and strains between various efforts to expand options for family-making, to reduce the inequities that structure family-making through assisted reproduction and adoption, to secure and protect reproductive rights, and to pursue reproductive justice. I suggest that two threads connect these various aspects of reproductive politics: the commitment to self-determination, and an expanded understanding of kinship beyond the nuclear and the biological. These two themes stand in complicated tension – visible in debates over the ethics of surrogacy, for instance, and in the ways that queer family-making is facilitated, in part, by class and racial inequalities – that need to be confronted head-on. I conclude with some examples of what political kinship built around family justice can and does look like at the level of concrete action.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Reproductive Biomedicine and Society Online
Reproductive Biomedicine and Society Online Social Sciences-Cultural Studies
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
审稿时长
7 weeks
期刊介绍: RBMS is a new journal dedicated to interdisciplinary discussion and debate of the rapidly expanding field of reproductive biomedicine, particularly all of its many societal and cultural implications. It is intended to bring to attention new research in the social sciences, arts and humanities on human reproduction, new reproductive technologies, and related areas such as human embryonic stem cell derivation. Its audience comprises researchers, clinicians, practitioners, policy makers, academics and patients.
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board Telling donor-conceived children about their conception: Evaluation of the use of the Donor Conception Network children’s books The missed disease? Endometriosis as an example of ‘undone science’ Financing future fertility: Women’s views on funding egg freezing Ignoring international alerts? The routinization of episiotomy in France in the 1980s and 1990s
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1