Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T05:47:24.721Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Complexifying Commodification, Consumption, ART, and Abortion

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2021

I. Glenn Cohen
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Like all her work, Jody Madeira’s “Conceiving of Products and the Products of Conception: Reflections on Commodification, Consumption, ART, and Abortion,” is a rich, nuanced discussion that mixes various conceptual vocabularies (Marxist, semiotics, legal) into a complex dish. If her work is like the best of French cooking, my comment, I fear, will be more like fast food. In the short space I have, I want to pick off a few items of common interest and discussion and reconfigure them.

Type
Symposium
Information
Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics , Volume 43 , Issue 2 , Summer 2015 , pp. 307 - 311
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics 2015

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Zelizer, V. A., The Purchase of Intimacy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2007); Radin, M. J., “Market Inalienability,” Harvard Law Review 100, no. 8 (1987): 1849–1937; Cohen, I. G., “Note, The Price of Everything, the Value of Nothing: Reframing the Commodification Debate,” Harvard Law Review 117, no. 2 (2003): 689–710.Google Scholar
Madeira, J. L., “Conceiving of Products and the Products of Conception: Reflections on Commodification, Consumption, ART, and Abortion,” Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 42, no. 3 (2015): 293–306.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Fertility Clinic Success Rate and Certification Act of 1992, Pub. L. No. 102–493, 106 Stat. 3146 (codified at 42 U.S.C. §§ 263a-1 to −7); Centers for Disease Control & Prevention, “Assisted Reproductive Technology,” available at <http://www.cdc.gov/ART> (last visited April 13, 2015).+(last+visited+April+13,+2015).>Google Scholar
Madison, K., “Regulating Health Care Quality in an Information Age,” U.C. Davis Law Review 40, no. 5 (2007): 1577–1654; Cutler, D. M. et al., “The Role of Information in Medical Markets: An Analysis of Publicly Reported Outcomes in Cardiac Surgery,” American Economic Review 94, no. 2 (2004): 342–346.Google Scholar
For one first person narrative of this kind of experience, see Bartholet, E., Family Bonds: Adoption, Infertility, and the New World of Child Production (Boston: Beacon Press 1999).Google Scholar
Fox, D., “Note, Racial Classification in Assisted Reproduction,” Yale Law Journal 118, no. 8 (2009): 1844–1893, at 1849–1853.Google Scholar
Ertman, M. M., “What's Wrong with a Parethood Market? A New and Improved Theory of Commodification,” North Carolina Law Review 82, no. 1 (2003): 1–57, at 28–29.Google Scholar
Cahn, N., “The New Kinship,” Georgetown Law Review 100, no. 2 (2012): 367–429, at 388–339.Google Scholar
Compare Jhordan C. v. Mary K., 224 Cal. Rptr. 530 (Cal. Ct. App. 1986); In re RC, 775 P.2d 27 (Col. 1989) (finding sperm donor to be the father) with Ferguson v. McKiernan, 940 A.2d 1236 (Pa. 2007) (rejecting sperm donor fatherhood in face of agreement to the contrary)Google Scholar
Garcia, M. E., “In with New Families, Out with Bad Law: Determining the Rights of Known Sperm Donors through Intent-Based Written Agreements,” Duke Journal of Gender Law and Policy 21, no. 1 (2014): 197–225, at 202–204.Google Scholar
Unger, R. M., “The Critical Legal Studies Movement,” Harvard Law Review 96, no. 3 (1983): 561–674, at 622–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, I. G., Patients with Passports: Medical Tourism, Law, and Ethics (New York: Oxford University Press 2014); Cohen, I. G., “Circumvention Tourism,” Cornell Law Review 97, no. 6 (2012): 1309–1398, at 1373–1386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Id. (Patients with Passports).Google Scholar
Cohen, I. G., “Regulating the Organ Market: Normative Foundations for Market Regulation,” Law and Contemporary Problems 77, no. 3 (2014): 71–100.Google Scholar
Almeling, R., “Gender and the Value of Bodily Goods: Commodification in Egg and Sperm Donation,” Law and Contemporary Problems 72, no. 3 (Summer 2009): 37–58, at 45–56.Google Scholar
See Cohen, , supra note 1; Cohen, , supra note 14.Google Scholar
See Cohen, , supra note 14.Google Scholar