This article examines the absence of biological relatedness in couples where the use of a third-party gamete donor casts doubt on the notion of conventional kinship. The authors observe that individuals who have used technology to create a family remediate relatedness through a dehistoricized idea of kinship in which the traditional concept is replaced with the concept of chance. The article also examines how inherited value is replaced by strategies that redefine the ways in which donor gamete parents can pass their values on to their children. This examination is accomplished by looking at how couples who used donated gametes articulate the ways in which familial relatedness is left open to chance.
Akrich, M., and B. Pasveer.1996. Embodiment and disembodiment in childbirth narratives. Body and Society10 (2/3): 63-84.
2.
Battaglia, D.1995. Fear of selfing in American cultural imaginary or "you are never alone with a clone." American Anthropologist97 (4): 672-78.
3.
Beck-Gernsheim, E.2002. Reinventing the family: In search of new lifestyles. Cambridge, MA: Polity.
4.
Becker, G.2002. Deciding whether or not to tell children about their donor insemination: An unresolved question in the United States. In Infertility around the globe: New thinking on childlessness, gender, and reproductive technologies, edited by F. van Balen and M. Inhorn, 119-33. Berkeley: University of California Press.
5.
Becker, G., A. Butler, and R. Nachtigall.2005. Resemblance talk: A challenge for parents whose children were conceived with donor gametes in the U.S. Social Science and Medicine61 (6): 1300-1309.
6.
Benner, P.1984. From novice to expert. Menlo Park, CA: Addison-Wesley.
7.
Borneman, J.1996. Until death do us part: Marriage/death in anthropological discourse. American Ethnologist23 (2): 215-38.
8.
---. 1997. Caring and being cared for: Displacing marriage, kinship, gender and sexuality. International Journal of Social Science154:623-35.
9.
Brooke, C.2006. Bruno Latour, reassembling the social. http://wrt-brooke.syr.edu/cgbvb/archives/2006/01/bruno_latour_re.html (accessed June 28, 2007).
10.
Callon, M.1986. Some elements of a sociology of translation: Domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieuc Bay. In Power, action and belief: A new sociology of knowledge, edited by J. Law, 196-233. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
11.
Carsten, J.2000. Cultures of relatedness: New approaches to the study of kinship. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
12.
---. 2004. After kinship. NewYork and Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
13.
Clark, M.M., and B. Anderson.1967. Culture and aging. Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas.
14.
Clarke, A.1996. Modernity, post-modernity and reproductive processes ca. 1890-1990 or "Mommy, where do cyborgs come from anyway?" In The cyborg handbook, edited by C. H. Gray , 139-56. New York: Routledge.
15.
Clifford, J., and G. Marcus.1986. Writing culture: The poetics and politics of ethnography. Berkeley: University of California Press.
16.
Coles, R.1989. The call of stories. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
17.
Dawkins, R.1990. The selfish gene. London: Oxford University Press.
18.
Deater-Deckard, K., and S. Petrill, eds. 2003. Gene-environment processes in social behaviors and relationships. New York: Haworth.
19.
Downey, G.L., J. Dumit, and S. Williams.1996. Cyborg anthropology. Cultural Anthropology10 (2): 264-69.
20.
Dundes, A.1990. Wet and dry: The evil eye. In The evil eye: A casebook, edited by A. Dundes, 257-98. Madison : University of Wisconsin Press.
21.
Edwards, D.1992. Discursive psychology. Inquiries in Social Construction Series. London: Sage.
22.
---. 2006. Managing subjectivity in talk. In Discursive research in practice: New approaches to psychology and interaction, edited by A. Hepburn and S. Wiggins.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
23.
Edwards, J.2000. Born and bred: Idioms of kinship and new reproductive technologies in England. London: Oxford University Press.
24.
Evans-Pritchard, E.E.1940. The Neur. London: Oxford University Press.
25.
---. 1951. Kinship and marriage among the Neur. Oxford, UK: Clarendon.
26.
Franklin, S.1997a. Embodied progress: A cultural account of assisted conception . New York: Routledge.
27.
---, Ed. 1997b. Reproducing reproduction: Kinship, power and technological innovation. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
28.
Friese, C., G. Becker, and R. Nachtigall.2006. Rethinking the biological clock: Eleventh hour moms, miracle moms and meanings of age-related infertility. Social Science and Medicine63 (6): 1550-60.
29.
Frishkopf, M.2003. Spiritual kinship and globalization. Religious Studies and Technology22 (1): 1-25.
30.
Geertz, C.1973. The interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books.
31.
Gellner, E.1960. The concept of kinship: With special reference to Mr. Needham's "Descent systems and ideal language." Philosophy of Science27 (2): 187-204.
32.
Genetics and Public Policy Center.2003. Expert panel to examine health effects of assisted reproductive technologies on children. Washington, DC: Genetics and Public Policy Center.
33.
Ginsburg, F. D., and R. Rapp, eds. 1995. Conceiving of the new world order: The global politics of reproduction. Berkeley: University of California Press.
34.
Goffman, E.1963. Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled identity. New York: Touchstone.
35.
Greenfield, D.A., and S.C. Klock.2004. Disclosure decisions among known and anonymous oocyte donation recipients. Fertility and Sterility81 (6): 565-71.
36.
Haraway, D.1991. Simians, cyborgs and women: The reinvention of nature . New York: Routledge.
37.
Harris, J.R., and S. Pinker.1999. The nurture assumption: Why children turn out the way they do. New York: Free Press.
38.
Harris, M.1979. Cultural materialism: The struggle for a science of culture . New York: Random House.
39.
Hayden, C.1995. Gender, genetics, and generation: Reformulating biology in lesbian kinship. Cultural Anthropology10 (1): 41-63.
40.
Hayles, K.N.1996. The life cycle of cyborgs: Writing the posthuman. In The cyborg handbook, edited by C. H. Gray, 321-40. New York: Routledge .
41.
Inhorn, M.2003. Local babies, global science: Gender, religion and in vitro fertilization in Egypt. New York: Routledge.
42.
Kaufman, S.1986. The ageless self. Madison: Wisconsin University Press.
43.
Kleinman, A.1988. The illness narratives. New York: Basic Books.
44.
Latour, B.1993. We have never been modern. Boston: Harvard University Press.
45.
---. 1994. On technological mediation. Philosophy, sociology, genealogy . Common Knowledge3 (2): 24-64.
46.
---. 1999. Pandora's hope. Essays on the reality of science studies . Boston: Harvard University Press .
47.
---. 2005. Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory . Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
48.
Law, J.1992. Notes on the theory of the actor-network: Ordering, strategy and heterogeneity. Systems Practice5 (4): 379-93.
49.
---. 1999. After ANT: Topology, naming and complexity. In Actor network theory and after, edited by J. Law and J. Hassard, 1-14. Oxford , UK and Keele, UK: Blackwell and the Sociological Review.
50.
Levi-Strauss, C.1963. Elementary structures of kinship. Boston: Beacon.
51.
---. 1974. Structural anthropology. New York: Basic Books.
52.
Mac Dougall, K., G. Becker, J. Scheib, and R.D. Nachtigall .2007. Strategies for disclosure: How parents approach telling their children that they were conceived with donor gametes. Fertility and Sterility87 (3): 524-33.
53.
Malinowski, B.1948[1992]. Magic, science and religion and other essays. Repr . Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland .
54.
Marcus, G.E., and M.M.J. Fischer.1986. Anthropology as cultural critique: An experimental moment in human science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
55.
McKinnon, S., and S. Franklin , eds. 2001. Relative values: Reconfiguring kinship studies. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
56.
Mead, M.1928[2001]. Coming of age in Samoa: A psychological study of primitive youth for Western civilization. Repr. New York : Perennial.
57.
Mishler, E.1986. Research interviewing. Cambridge, MA : Harvard University Press.
58.
Murray, C., and S. Golombok.2003. To tell or not to tell: The decision-making process of egg-donation parents. Human Fertility6 (2): 89-95.
59.
Nachtigall, R., J.M. Tschann, S.S. Quiroga, L. Pitcher, and G. Becker.1997. Stigma, disclosure and issues of parents and children conceived through donor insemination. Fertility and Sterility68 (1): 83-89.
60.
Nelkin, D., and S. Lindee.1995. The DNA mystique: The gene as a cultural icon. New York: Freeman.
61.
Pinker, S.2002. The blank slate. New York: Penguin .
62.
Pitt-Rivers, J.1968. Kinship II: Pseudo-kinship. In International encyclopedia of the social sciences, edited by D. L. Sills.New York: Macmillan .
63.
Rabinow, P.1987. Interpreting social science: A second look. Berkeley: University of California Press.
64.
---. 1996. Essays on the anthropology of reason. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
65.
Radcliff-Brown, A.R.1940. The study of kinship systems. Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland71 (1/2): 1-18.
66.
Rapp, R., H. Ragone, and F. Winddance Twine, eds. 2000 . Ideologies and technologies of motherhood: Race, class, sexuality, nationalism. New York: Routledge .
Ridley, M.2004. The agile gene: How nature turns on nurture. New York: Perennial.
69.
Rowe, D.C.1995. The limits of family influence: Genes, experience and behavior. New York: Guilford.
70.
Schmoll, T., V. Dietrich, W. Winkel, J.T. Epplen, and T. Lubjan.2003. Long-term fitness consequences of female extra-pair mating is socially monogamous passerine. Proceedings: Biological Sciences270 (1512): 259-64.
71.
Schneider, D.1980. American kinship: A cultural account. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
72.
---. 1984. Critique of the study of kinship. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
73.
Strathern, M.1990. Reproducing the future: Essays on anthropology, kinship and new reproductive technologies. New York: Routledge.
74.
Thompson, C.1996. Ontological choreography: Agency through objectification in infertility clinics. Social Studies of Science26 (3): 575-610.
75.
---. 2001. Strategic naturalizing: Kinship in an infertility clinic . In Relative values: Reconfiguring kinship studies, edited by S. Franklin and S. McKinnon, 175-202. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
76.
---. 2005. Making parents: The ontological choreography of reproductive technologies. Boston: MIT Press .
