Book contents
- Donor-Linked Families in the Digital Age
- Donor-Linked Families in the Digital Age
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Tables
- Contributors
- Acknowledgements
- Donor-Conceived Families
- Part I ‘DIY’ Donor Linking: Issues and Implications
- Part II Children’s and Adults’ Lived Experiences in Diverse Donor-Linked Families
- Chapter 6 The Importance of Donor Siblings to Teens and Young Adults
- Chapter 7 The Experiences of Donor-Conceived People Making Contact with Same-Donor Offspring through Fiom’s Group Meetings
- Chapter 8 ‘It’s All on Their Terms’
- Chapter 9 On Familial Haunting
- Chapter 10 Assisted Reproduction and Making Kin Connections between Māori and Pākehā in Aotearoa New Zealand
- Chapter 11 ‘Spunkles’, Donors, and Fathers
- Part III Institutionalised Resistance to Openness
- Index
- References
Chapter 10 - Assisted Reproduction and Making Kin Connections between Māori and Pākehā in Aotearoa New Zealand
from Part II - Children’s and Adults’ Lived Experiences in Diverse Donor-Linked Families
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 13 July 2023
Book contents
- Donor-Linked Families in the Digital Age
- Donor-Linked Families in the Digital Age
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Tables
- Contributors
- Acknowledgements
- Donor-Conceived Families
- Part I ‘DIY’ Donor Linking: Issues and Implications
- Part II Children’s and Adults’ Lived Experiences in Diverse Donor-Linked Families
- Chapter 6 The Importance of Donor Siblings to Teens and Young Adults
- Chapter 7 The Experiences of Donor-Conceived People Making Contact with Same-Donor Offspring through Fiom’s Group Meetings
- Chapter 8 ‘It’s All on Their Terms’
- Chapter 9 On Familial Haunting
- Chapter 10 Assisted Reproduction and Making Kin Connections between Māori and Pākehā in Aotearoa New Zealand
- Chapter 11 ‘Spunkles’, Donors, and Fathers
- Part III Institutionalised Resistance to Openness
- Index
- References
Summary
In 2004, the HART Act legislated openness and identifiability regarding donor information for children conceived with the aid of donor-assisted technologies in Aotearoa New Zealand. As well as acknowledging the psychological and emotional well-being of openness for donor offspring, the rationale for change in policy and law also recognised the importance of tracing genealogy and the exchange of information about genetic origins. Of particular significance to Māori, the transfer of reproductive materials between known and unknown donors and recipients has implications for social identity in ways that may not be deemed as significant for non-Māori. This chapter draws on qualitative research data from a study conducted in Aotearoa with people accessing assisted reproduction for the purpose of family building. The aim of the chapter is to critically examine assumptions about the differences between Māori and Pākehā understandings of kinship affinities and relatedness in the process of making families.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Donor-Linked Families in the Digital AgeRelatedness and Regulation, pp. 174 - 191Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2023
References
Adair, V., & Rogan, C. (1998). Infertility and parenting: The story so far. In Adair, V. & Dixon, R. (Eds.), The Family in Aotearoa/New Zealand (pp. 260–283). Auckland: Addison Wesley Longman.Google Scholar
Baker, M. (2005). Medically assisted conception: Revolutionizing family or perpetuating a nuclear and gendered model? Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 36(4), 521–543. https://doi.org/10.3138/jcfs.36.4.521CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2013). Successful Qualitative Research: A Practical Guide for Beginners. Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
Coney, S., & Else, A. (1999). Protecting Our Future: The Case for Greater Regulation of Assisted Reproductive Technology. Auckland: Women’s Health Action Trust.Google Scholar
Cram, F., & Pitama, S. (1998). Ko tōku whānau, ko tōku mana. In Adair, V. & Dixon, R. (Eds.), The Family in Aotearoa/New Zealand (pp. 130–157). Auckland: Addison Wesley Longman.Google Scholar
Daniels, K. (2007). Donor gametes: Anonymous or identified? Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 21(1), 113–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2006.09.010CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Daniels, K., & Douglass, A. (2008). Access to genetic information by donor offspring and donors: Medicine, policy and law in New Zealand. Medicine and Law, 27, 131–146.Google Scholar
Daniels, K., & Lewis, G. M. (1996). Openness of information in the use of donor gametes: Developments in New Zealand. Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology, 14(1), 57–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/02646839608405859CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daniels, K. R., Kramer, W., & Perez-y-Perez, M. V. (2012). Semen donors who are open to contact with their offspring: Issues and implications for them and their families. Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 25, 670–677. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2012.09.009CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Durie, M. (2008). Bioethics in research: The ethics of indigeneity. Paper presented at the Ninth Global Forum on Bioethics in Research. http://gfbr9.hrc.govt.nz/articleGoogle Scholar
Durie-Hall, D., & Metge, J. (1992). Kua Tutū Te Puehu, Kia Mau: Maori aspirations and family law. In Heneghan, M. & Atkin, B. (Eds.), Family Law Policy in New Zealand (pp. 54–82). Auckland: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, J., & Irwin, R. (2002). Oocyte Recipients and Donors: Choosing a Relationship, Auckland, New Zealand: Fertility Associates. Unpublished paper.Google Scholar
Foaese, A. (2017). Pasifika Women’s Experiences of Infertility in Canterbury and Wellington [Unpublished master’s thesis]. University of Otago.Google Scholar
Gibson, H. (2021). Kin-making in the Reproductive Penumbra: Surrogacy in Aotearoa New Zealand [Unpublished doctoral thesis]. Te Herenga Waka/Victoria University of Wellington.Google Scholar
Glover, M., & Rousseau, B. (2007). ‘Your child is your whakapapa’: Māori considerations of assisted human reproduction and relatedness. SITES: New Series, 4(2), 117–136. https://doi.org/10.11157/sites-vol4iss2id76Google Scholar
Glover, M. (2008). Māori Attitudes to Assisted Human Reproduction: An Exploratory Study. Auckland: University of Auckland, Department of Social & Community Health.Google Scholar
Glover, M., McKree, A., & Dyall, L. (2009). Assisted reproduction: Issues for Takatāpui (New Zealand Indigenous non-heterosexuals). Journal of GLBT Family Studies, 5(4), 295–311. https://doi.org/10.1080/15504280903263702CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hargreaves, K., & Daniels, K. (2007). Parents’ dilemmas in sharing donor insemination conception stories with their children. Children & Society, 21, 420–431. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1099-0860.2006.00079.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hertz, R., Nelson, M. K., & Kramer, W. (2015). Sperm donors describe the experience of contact with their donor-conceived offspring. Facts, Views & Vision in ObGyn, 7(2), 91–100.Google ScholarPubMed
Kerekere, E. (2017). Part of the Whānau: The Emergence of Takatāpui Identity – He Whāriki Takatāpui [Unpublished doctoral thesis]. Victoria University of Wellington.Google Scholar
Lovelock, K. (2010). Conceiving reproduction: New reproductive technologies and the redefinition of kinship narrative in New Zealand society. Anthropological Forum, 20(2), 125–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/00664677.2010.487296Google Scholar
MacManus, J. (2017). Meet the couple who tried to get sperm on Reddit. https://thespinoff.co.nz/parenting/17-10-2017/meet-the-couple-who-tried-to-get-sperm-on-reddit/ (accessed 20 September 2021).Google Scholar
Marriot, L., & Sim, D. (2015). Indicators of inequality for Māori and Pacific people. Journal of New Zealand Studies, 20, 24–50.Google Scholar
Mason, J. (2008). Tangible affinities and real-life fascination of kinship. Sociology, 42(1), 29–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038507084824CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McRae, K. O., & Nikora, L. W. (2006) Whāngai: Remembering, understanding and experiencing. MAI Review, 1, 1–18.Google Scholar
National Women’s Health. (2021). Public funding. National Women’s Health https://nationalwomenshealth.adhb.govt.nz/our-services/fertility/public-funding/ (accessed 19 October 2021).Google Scholar
Nordqvist, P. (2014). Bringing kinship into being: Connectedness, donor conception and lesbian parenthood. Sociology, 48(2), 268–283. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038513477936Google Scholar
Nordqvist, P. (2019). Kinship: How being related matters in personal life. In V. May, V. & Nordqvist, P. (Eds.), Sociology of Personal Life (2nd ed., pp 46–59). London: Red Globe Press.Google Scholar
Nordqvist, P. (2019a). Un/familiar connections: On the relevance of a sociology of personal life for exploring egg and sperm donation. Sociology of Health & Illness, 41(3), 601–615. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.12862Google Scholar
Nordqvist, P., & Smart, C. (2014). Relative Strangers: Family Life, Genes and Donor Conception. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Neill, K., Hamer, H. P., & Dixon, R. (2012). ‘A lesbian family in a straight world’: The impact of the transition to parenthood on couple relationships in planned lesbian families. Women’s Studies Journal, 26(2), 39–53.Google Scholar
Pihama, L. (2012). Experiences of Whānau Māori within fertility clinics. In Reynolds, P. & Smith, C. (Eds.), The Gift of Children: Māori and Infertility (pp. 203–234). Wellington: Huia Publishers.Google Scholar
Pūtaiora Writing Group. (2010). Te Ara Tika: Guidelines for Māori Research Ethics: A Framework for Researchers and Ethics Committee Members. Auckland: Health Research Council of New Zealand.Google Scholar
Reynolds, P., & Smith, C. (2012). Introduction: He Kākano: Māori and assisted reproductive technologies. In Reynolds, P. & Smith, C. (Eds.), The Gift of Children: Māori and Infertility (pp. xiii–xix). Wellington: Huia Publishers.Google Scholar
Righarts, A., Dickson, N. P., Ekeroma, A., Gray, A. R., Parkin, L., & Gillett, W. R. (2021). The burden of infertility in New Zealand: A baseline survey of prevalence and service use. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 61, 439–447. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.13323CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Salmond, A. (2012). Ontological quarrels: Indigeneity, exclusion and citizenship in a relational world. Anthropological Theory, 12(2), 115–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/1463499612454119Google Scholar
Shaw, R. M. (2020). Should surrogate pregnancy arrangements be enforceable in Aotearoa New Zealand? Policy Quarterly, 16(1), 18–25. https://doi.org/10.26686/pq.v16i1.6351Google Scholar
Shaw, R. (2007). The gift-exchange and reciprocity of women in donor-assisted conception. The Sociological Review, 55(2), 293–310. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.2007.00706.xGoogle Scholar
Shaw, R. M., & Fehoko, E. (2022). Epistemic injustice and Body Mass Index: Examining Māori and Pacific women’s access to fertility treatment in Aotearoa New Zealand. Fat Studies. Online first. https://doi:10.1080/21604851.2022.2063507Google Scholar
Smith, C. (2012). Tamaiti Whāngai and fertility. In Reynolds, P. & Smith, C. (Eds.), The Gift of Children: Māori and Infertility (pp. 143–202). Wellington: Huia Publishers.Google Scholar
Surtees, N. (2017). Narrating Connections and Boundaries: Constructing Relatedness in Lesbian Known Donor Familial Configurations [Unpublished doctoral thesis]. University of Canterbury.Google Scholar
Te Aka Matua o te Ture/Law Commission (2021). Te Kōpū Whāngai: He Arotake: Review of Surrogacy. Wellington: NZLC.Google Scholar
Waldby, C. (2019). The Oocyte Economy; The Changing Meaning of Human Eggs. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar