This article explores how conceptual frameworks around new reproductive technologies may be influenced by religious and cultural contexts. Using data derived from an Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) funded project on the public perceptions of gamete donation in British South Asian communities, the article discusses women's narratives of third-party assisted conception in infertility treatment, as constructed in focus group discussions. The analysis suggests a strong contrast in perceptions of egg donation and sperm donation. Embodied motherhood had the effect of naturalizing the use of donated eggs for women. Fatherhood, however, was seen as constituted by genetic relatedness in a patrilineal cultural context. Using donated eggs, then, was considered less problematic than using donated sperm. However, the embodiment of motherhood, the attachment of women to their biological material and the emotional ties of even `detached' reproduction, meant that women simultaneously had difficulty in imagining themselves becoming egg donors.
Anthias, Floya (2002) `Where do I Belong? Narrating Collective Identity and Translocational Positionality', Ethnicities2(4): 491-514.
2.
Becker, Gay (2002) `Deciding Whether to Tell Children about Donor Insemination: An Unresolved Question in the United States', in M. C. Inhorn and F. van Balen (eds) Infertility around the Globe: New Thinking on Childlessness, Gender, and Reproductive Technologies, pp. 119-33. Berkeley : University of California Press.
3.
Bharadwaj, Aditya (2003) `Why Adoption is not an Option in India: The Visibility of Infertility, the Secrecy of Donor Insemination, and Other Cultural Complexities' , Social Science and Medicine56(9): 1867-80.
4.
Birke, Lynda and Whitworth, Rosalind (1998) `Seeking Knowledge: Women, Science, and Islam', Women's Studies International Forum21(2): 147-59.
5.
Blyth, Eric and Landau, Ruth (2004) Third Party Assisted Conception across Cultures: Social, Legal and Ethical Perspectives. London: Jessica Kingsley.
6.
Carsten, Janet (2003) After Kinship: New Departures in Anthropology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7.
Chui, Lai-Fong and Knight, Deborah (1999) `How Useful are Focus Groups for Obtaining the Views of Minority Groups?', in R. Barbour and J. Kitzinger (eds) Developing Focus Group Research. Politics, Theory and Practice, pp. 99-112. London : Sage.
8.
Culley, Lorraine and Hudson, Nicky (2006) `Disrupted Reproduction and Deviant Bodies: Pronatalism and British South Asian Communities', International Journal of Diversity Organisations, Communities and Nations5(2): 117-26.
9.
Culley, Lorraine, Rapport, Frances, Katbamna, Savita, Johnson, Mark and Hudson, Nicky (2004) A Study of the Provision of Infertility Services to South Asian Communities, Final Report to NHS Executive Trent. Leicester: De Montfort University.
10.
Culley, Lorraine, Hudson, Nicky, Rapport Frances, Johnson, Mark and Katbamna, Savita (2006) `British South Asian Communities and Infertility Services', Human Fertility9(1): 37-45.
11.
Culley, Lorraine, Hudson, Nicky, Johnson Mark, Rapport, Frances and Katbamna, Savita (2007) ` "I Know about One Treatment Where They Keep the Egg Somewhere": British South Asian Community Understandings of Infertility and its Treatment', Diversity in Health and Social Care4(2): 113-21.
12.
Daniels, Ken and Haimes, Erica (1998) Donor Insemination: International Social Science Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13.
Douglas, Mary (1992) Risk and Blame: Essays in Cultural Theory. London: Routledge. Edwards, Jeanette (1998) `Donor Insemination and "Public Opinion" ', in K. Daniels and E. Haimes (eds) Donor Insemination: International Social Science Perspectives, pp. 151-72. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
14.
Edwards, Jeanette (1999) `Explicit Connections: Ethnographic Enquiry in North-West England', in J. Edwards, S. Franklin, E. Hirsch, F. Price and M. Strathern (eds) Technologies of Procreation: Kinship in the Age of Assisted Conception, pp. 60-85. London: Routledge.
15.
Edwards, Jeanette (2002) `Taking "Public" Understanding Seriously', New Genetics and Society21(3): 315-25.
16.
Edwards, Jeanette (2004) `Incorporating Incest: Gamete, Body and Relation in Assisted Conception', Journal of Royal Anthropological Institute10(4): 755-74. Featherstone, Katie, Atkinson, Paul, Bharadwaj, Aditya and Clarke, Angus (2006) Risky Relations: Family, Kinship and the New Genetics . Oxford: Berg.
17.
Franklin, Sarah (1997) Embodied Progress: A Cultural Account of Assisted Conception. London: Routledge.
18.
Franklin, Sarah and McKinnon, Susan (2002) Relative Values: Reconfiguring Kinship Studies . Durham, NC and London: Duke University Press.
19.
Franklin, Sarah and Ragone, Helené (1998) Reproducing Reproduction: Kinship, Power and Technological Innovation. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Golombok, Susan and Murray, Clare (1999) Egg and Semen Donation: A Survey of UK Licensed Centres, Report for the National Gamete Donation Trust. London: City University.
20.
Greil, Arthur (1997) `Infertility and Psychological Distress: A Critical Review of the Literature', Social Science and Medicine45(11): 1679-704.
21.
Haimes, Erica (1993) `Issues of Gender in Gamete Donation', Social Science and Medicine36(1): 85-93.
22.
HFEA (Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority) (2006) SEED Report: A Report on the Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority's Review of Sperm, Egg and Embryo Donation in the United Kingdom. London: HFEA.
23.
HFEA (Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority) (2007) `Facts and Figures'; at: www.hfea.gov.uk/cps/rde/xchg/SID-3F57D79B-1BB23833/hfea/hs.xsl/1215.html (accessed 13 March 2007).
24.
Hilgartner, Stephen (1992) `The Social Construction of Risk Objects: Or How to Pry Open Networks of Risk', in J. Short and L. Clarke (eds) Organisations, Uncertainties and Risk, pp. 39-53. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
25.
Hudson, Nicky, Culley, Lorraine., Rapport, Frances, Johnson, Mark and Bharadwaj, Aditya (2008) ` "Public" Perceptions of Gamete Donation: A Research Review', Public Understanding of Science; at: pus.sagepub.com/cgi/rapidpdf/0963662507078396v1 (print version forthcoming 2009)
26.
Inhorn, Marcia (2005) `Fatwas and ARTS: IVF and Gamete Donation in Sunni v. Shi'a Islam', Journal of Gender, Race and Justice9(2): 291-318.
27.
Inhorn, Marcia and van Balen, Frank (eds) (2002) Infertility around the Globe . Berkeley: University of California Press.
28.
Jayaram, Narayana (ed.) (2004) The Indian Diaspora: Dynamics of Migration. London: Sage.
29.
Konrad, Monika (1998) `Ova Donation and the Symbols of Substance: Some Variations on the Theme of Sex, Gender and the Partible Body', Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute4(4): 643-67.
30.
Konrad, Monika (2005) Nameless Relations: Anonymity, Melanesia and Reproduction. Gift Exchange between British Ova Donors and Recipients. New York and Oxford: Berghahn Books.
31.
Lessor, Roberta, Reitz, Karl, Balamaceda, Jose and Asch, Ricardo (1990) `A Survey of Public Attitudes toward Oocyte Donation between Sisters', Human Reproduction5(7): 889-92.
32.
Lupton, Deborah (1999) Risk. London: Routledge.
33.
Lupton, Deborah and Barclay, Lesley (1997) Constructing Fatherhood: Discourses and Experiences . London: Sage.
34.
Martin, Emily (1991) `The Egg and the Sperm: How Science Constructed a Romance Based on Stereotypical Male-Female Roles', Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society16(3): 485-501.
35.
Nash, Catherine (2004) `Genetic Kinship', Cultural Studies18(1): 1-33.
36.
Nelson, Lynn Hankinson (1990) Who Knows: From Quine to Feminist Empiricism. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
37.
Oakley, Ann (1993) Essays on Women, Medicine and Health. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
38.
Ramji, Hasmita (2006) `Journeys of Difference: The Use of Migratory Narratives among British Hindu Gujaratis', Ethnic and Racial Studies29(4): 702-24.
39.
Reissman, Catherine Kohler (2000) `Stigma and Everyday Practices. Childless Women in South India', Gender and Society14(1): 111-35.
40.
Ritchie, Jane and Spencer, Liz (1994) `Qualitative Data Analysis for Applied Policy Research', in A. Bryman and B. Burgess (eds) Analysing Qualitative Data, pp. 173-94. London: Routledge.
41.
Stonehouse, Julia (1999) `Procreation, Patriarchy and Medical Science: Resistance to Recognizing Maternal Contributions in European Embryological Thought', in P. Loizos and P. Heady (eds) Conceiving Persons: Ethnographies of Procreation, Fertility and Growth, pp. 219-43. London and New Brunswick, NJ: Athlone Press.
42.
Strathern, Marilyn (1992) After Nature: English Kinship in the Late Twentieth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
43.
Strathern, Marilyn (2005) Kinship, Law and the Unexpected. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
44.
Sturgis, Patrick and Allum, Nick (2004) `Science in Society: Re-Evaluating the Deficit Model of Public Attitudes', Public Understanding of Science13(1): 55-74.
45.
Thompson, Charis (2005) Making Parents: The Ontological Choreography of Reproductive Technologies. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
46.
Van Rooij, Floor, van Balen, Frank and Hermanns, Jo M. A. (2004) `A Review of Islamic Middle Eastern Migrants: Traditional and Religious Cultural Beliefs about Procreation in the Context of Infertility Treatment', Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology22(4): 321-31.
47.
Wagner, Wolfgang, Elejabarrieta, Fran and Lahnsteiner, Ingrid (1995) `How the Sperm Dominates the Ovum - Objectification by Metaphor in the Social Representation of Conception' , European Journal of Social Psychology25: 671-88.
48.
Waterton, Claire and Wynne, Brian (1999) `Can Focus Groups Access Community Views?', in R. Barbour and J. Kitzinger (eds) Developing Focus Group Research: Politics, Theory and Practice, pp. 127-43. London: Sage.
49.
Weston, Kath (2001) `Kinship, Controversy, and the Sharing of Substance: The Race/Class Politics of Blood Transfusion', in S. Franklin, S and S. McKinnon (eds) Relative Values: Reconfiguring Kinship Studies, pp. 147-74. Durham, NC and London: Duke University Press.
50.
Widge, Anjali (2005) `Seeking Conception: Experiences of Urban Indian Women with in Vitro Fertilisation', Patient Education and Counseling59(3): 226-33.
51.
Wynne, Brian (1992) `Misunderstood and Misunderstanding: Social Identities and Public Uptake of Science', Public Understanding of Science1(3): 281-304.
