:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:跨國大型商業精子銀行作為現代機構之作用與社會結果
作者:孫佳婷
作者(外文):Sun, Chia-Ting
校院名稱:國立交通大學
系所名稱:社會與文化研究所
指導教授:朱元鴻
學位類別:博士
出版日期:2021
主題關鍵詞:現代性生育自主供體精子生殖消費捐贈受孕家庭ModernityReproductive AutonomyDonor SpermReproductive ConsumptionDonor-Conceived Family
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 歷年統計:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(2) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:34
跨國大型商業精子銀行在近三十年間展現廣泛的影響力,成為單身女性與女同志追求生育自主、構建家庭之常見策略,但大眾對其評價分歧,且相關研究仍顯分布不均,使筆者對其存在之本質產生探問。因此,本研究之目的乃在將跨國大型商業精子銀行視作掌握資源、權力與生產敘事的現代機構來進行整體性審視,將之問題化並置入當代社會中重新考察。本研究提出兩個研究問題,其一是跨國大型商業精子銀行之機制、作用與展現方式為何?其二則是跨國大型商業精子銀行如何影響隨捐贈受孕家庭之構建而開展的新社會關係?本研究主要採檔案分析方法,立意以兩間源自丹麥且全球著名的跨國大型商業精子銀行「歐洲精子銀行 (European Sperm Bank, ESB)」與「克雷奧斯國際精子銀行 (Cryos International Sperm Bank, Cryos)」之網站為對象進行考察,資料蒐集與分析依據不同進程,分別於2020年1月至4月間完成;而筆者於2016年至2020年在不同地域的田野調查資料,以及依不同媒介與結構所進行的訪談,則作為分析參照與對話之依據。研究結果顯示,跨國大型商業精子銀行強調自身專業、自律、數據化、科學化與規制化之形象,主要透過圖像、敘事、社交媒體、類型化的捐贈者檔案等虛擬符碼與象徵物運作「想像」機制,旨在刺激女性的生殖欲望與行動;並藉由「區分」機制對捐贈者進行篩選與分類,意在拓展可售性、接合使用者的文化品味與需求,而經濟能力的差異也定位出主要使用者輪廓—高社經地位、高教育水平、具各類資本與調用資源之能力,且追求工具理性與時效的單身女性與女同志。兩種機制之意圖都是為了刺激消費。跨國大型商業精子銀行作為生殖資源與機會的銷售者、生物與身分資訊的管理者、親緣敘事與文化概念之生產者,在捐贈受孕家庭網絡等新社會關係發展中扮演核心角色,它同時也是符號與欲望交換的展示場域。本研究認為,跨國大型商業精子銀行一方面是支援女性實踐生育的重要階段性解方,促生了新型態家庭與新母職,但同時也帶來倫理與風險治理等面向的論辯,亟需大眾於在地脈絡中以對話或政策修整等方式進行回應。而生殖消費的過程,即是使用者與跨國大型商業精子銀行相互形塑的過程,跨國大型商業精子銀行作為人工協助生殖現代性的一種徵象與產物,探查其在當代社會中的變化,可為我們指出一條反思文化與社會情勢變遷之路徑。
International commercial sperm banks have shown wide influence in the past three decades, and have become a common strategy for single women and lesbians to pursue reproductive autonomy and build families. However, the public holds different opinions on the issue, and related studies are not evenly distributed; therefore, the doubt was emerged from the essence of its existence. This research aims to take the international commercial sperm bank as a modern institution that controls resources, power and produces the narrative to conduct a holistic review, and to problematize and reexamine it in the contemporary society. Two research questions are raised in the research. First, what is the mechanism, function and display of the international commercial sperm bank? Second, how does the international commercial sperm bank influence the new social relationships that are developed with the construction of the donor-conceived families? This research mainly adopts the documentary research, and is based on the study of websites of two famous international commercial sperm banks from Denmark, “European Sperm Bank (ESB)” and “Cryos International Sperm Bank (Cryos)” for investigation. The data collection and analysis are based on different processes, completed between January and April, 2020. The materials of the field research conducted in different regions from 2016 to 2020 and the interviews conducted with different media and structures are both used as the basis for discussion and comparison. The research results show that international commercial sperm banks are inclined to emphasize their professional, self-disciplined, digitalized, scientific and regulatory image. They apply virtual codes and symbols to operate the “imagination” mechanism, such as images, narratives, social media, and typed donor files. It aims at stimulating women’s reproductive desires and actions. Through the “distinction” mechanism they screen and classify donors, it is intended to expand the saleability and takes into account the cultural tastes and needs of the users. The difference in economic ability also locates the main user profile—single women and lesbians with high social and economic status, high education level, various capital and resource allocation capabilities, and pursuing instrumental rationality and timeliness. The intention of both mechanisms is to stimulate consumption. International commercial sperm banks play a central role in the development of new social relations such as donor-conceived family networks as sellers of reproductive resources and opportunities, managers of biological and identity information, and producers of kinship narratives and cultural concepts. They are also the exhibition field for the exchange of symbols and desires. This research believes that international commercial sperm banks are on the one hand an important staged solution to support women’s practice of fertility, which has promoted the birth of new types of families and new motherhoods, but at the same time it also brings about the issues of ethics and risk governance and other aspects of the debate, urging the general public to respond in the local context through discussion or policy modification. The process of reproductive consumption is also the process of mutual shaping between users and international commercial sperm banks. As a symbol and product of the modernity of artificial assisted reproduction, international commercial sperm banks can be used as a representation of the changes in contemporary society and direct us to a path to reflect on changes in cultural and social conditions.
?。?〈創世紀〉,《聖經》。1:26-27。
公共政策網路參與平臺。2018。〈開放單身女可以合法施行「人工受孕」及「試管嬰兒」〉。https://join.gov.tw/idea/detail/53479b9a-8cbb-4ea0-9f16-2294c97f24ac。(2020/09/27瀏覽)
王道還。2017。《科學史沙龍—Eugenics vs 優生學:為什麼「優生學」不是髒字眼?》。
吳嘉苓。2002。〈台灣的新生殖科技與性別政治,1950-2000〉,《台灣社會研究季刊》第四十五期,頁1-67。
吳嘉苓。2011。〈編排風險:多胚胎孕育的多重社會科技網絡〉,《臺灣社會學》第二十二期,頁111-156。
吳嘉苓等。2017。〈人工協助生殖科技的資料登錄與健康監測:跨國比較研究〉,《台灣衛誌》第三十六卷第一期,頁6-20。
李映荻。2002。《北歐神話》。臺北:水牛圖書。
叔本華。?。〈叔本華名言〉,《漢語網》。http://www.chinesewords.org/wisdom/show-1554.html。(2020/05/16瀏覽)
邱仲麟。2019。〈從明目到商戰—明代以降眼鏡的物質文化史〉,《中央研究院歷史語言研究所集刊》第九十卷第三期,頁449-583。
姬妍等。2015。〈《基因完整法》:瑞典輔助生殖立法最新進展—兼評輔助生殖子女基因知情權條款〉,《南京中醫藥大學學報 (社會科學版)》第十六期,頁32-35。
孫佳婷。2011。〈自助旅行之教育意義初探〉,《大專體育》第一百一十七期,頁15-20。
——。2017。〈全球化下生殖旅遊現況與評析〉,《台灣衛誌》第三十六卷第二期,頁95-106。
莊婉潔。2002。〈全球投資風險面面觀系列報導—丹麥〉,《經貿透視雙周刊》第七十八期。https://www.trademag.org.tw/page/itemsd/?id=385297&no=2。(2019/04/30瀏覽)
郭玟婷。2018。〈英國國立精子銀行將停止接受精子捐贈〉。http://www.angle.com.tw/ahlr/discovery/post.aspx?ipost=2404。(2019/04/27瀏覽)
陳懷恩。2008。《圖像學:視覺藝術的意義與解釋》。臺北:如果出版社。
黃貞貞。2016/10/28。〈資金短缺,英首座國家精子銀行熄燈〉,《中央通訊社》。https://www.cna.com.tw/news/ahel/201610280028.aspx。(2017/01/24瀏覽)
楊朝明、林品章。2007。〈隱喻修辭的視覺圖像與標題對廣告效果的影響〉,《設計學報》第十二卷第一期,頁19-39。
經濟部投資業務處。2018。《丹麥投資環境簡介》。臺北:經濟部投資業務處。http://twbusiness.nat.gov.tw/countryPage.do?id=361922570&country=DK。(2019/04/30瀏覽)
臺北市立動物園保育網。2020。〈雕鴞〉,《動物百科》。https://www.zoo.gov.tw/baike/detail.aspx?id=826。(2020/06/17瀏覽)
蔡鴻濱。2006。〈網路社會運動之語藝分析:以苦勞網中「香港反WTO」事件爲例〉,《傳播與管理研究》第六卷第一期,頁2-48。
衛生福利部國民健康署。2016。〈不可不知的人工生殖法—報你知〉。https://www.hpa.gov.tw/Pages/Detail.aspx?nodeid=500&pid=434。(2020/09/27瀏覽)
駐丹麥台北代表處。2019。〈國家相關資訊〉。https://www.roc-taiwan.org/dk/post/1969.html。(2019/04/30瀏覽)
駐丹麥台北代表處經濟組。2019a。〈丹麥出口創就業機會新紀錄〉。https://www.trademag.org.tw/page/newsid1/?id=746575&iz=6。(2019/04/30瀏覽)
駐丹麥台北代表處經濟組。2019b。〈丹麥生命科學領域的黃金時代〉。https://www.trademag.org.tw/page/newsid1/?id=745698&iz=6。(2019/04/30瀏覽)
謝宏聲。2012。《圖像與觀看—現代性視覺制度的誕生》。桂林:廣西師範大學出版社。
謝鵬。2012/09/29。〈中國精子庫三十年:精子質量低,買精不容易〉,《南方周末》。http://discovery.163.com/12/0929/08/8CICBNTO000125LI_all_mobile.html。 (2017/01/24瀏覽)
Adamson, David. 2002. “Regulation of Assisted Reproductive Technologies in the United States,” in Fertility and Sterility 78 (5): 932-942.
Adrian, Stine Willum. 2010. “Sperm Stories: Policies and Practices of Sperm Banking in Denmark and Sweden,” in European Journal of Women's Studies 17 (4): 393-411.
Agigian, Amy. 2004. Baby Steps: How Lesbian Alternative Insemination is Changing the World. Middletown: Wesleyan University Press.
Almeling, Rene. 2006. “‘Why Do You Want to Be a Donor?’: Gender and the Production of Altruism in Egg and Sperm Donation,” in New Genetics and Society 25 (2): 143-157.
——. 2007. “Selling Genes, Selling Gender: Egg Agencies, Sperm Banks, and the Medical Market in Genetic Material,” in American Sociological Review 72 (3): 319-340.
——. 2010. Egg Agencies, Sperm Banks, and the Medical Market in Genetic Material,” in Intimate Labors: Cultures, Technologies, and the Politics of Care, edited by E. Boris and R. S. Parreñas, pp. 63-77. Standford: Standford University Press.
——. 2011. Sex Cells: The Medical Market for Eggs and Sperm. California: University of California Press.
American Society for Reproductive Medicine. 2018. Third-Party Reproduction: A Guide for Patients. Birmingham: American Society for Reproductive Medicine. https://www.asrm.org/topics/topics-index/third-party-reproduction/ (Date visited: September 01, 2019)
Andreassen, Rikke. 2016. “Online Kinship: Social Media as a Site for Challenging Notions of Gender and Family,” in MedieKultur: Journal of Media and Communication Research 32 (61): 76-92.
——. 2017. “Social Imaginaries, Sperm and Whiteness: Race and Reproduction in British Media,” in Journal of Intercultural Studies 38 (2): 123-138.
BabyQuest CryoBank. 2014/10/01. “India’ s First International Sperm Bank: Back with a Big Bang,” PRNewswire. https://www.prnewswire.com/in/news-releases/indias-first-international-sperm-bank-back-with-a-big-bang-277697041.html (Date visited: September 01, 2019)
——. 2019. “About Us.” https://www.babyquest.in/about-us/ (Date visited: December 12, 2019)
Baden-Lasar, Eli and Susan Dominus. 2019/06/26. “A Family Portrait: Brothers, Sisters, Strangers,” The New York Times Magazine. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/06/26/magazine/sperm-donor-siblings.html?mtrref=www.bing.com&gwh=6A5C39AE211601898952BF5095BB57BF&gwt=pay&assetType=REGIWALL (Date visited: June 04, 2020)
Baker, Robin (貝克) 著,李沛沂、章蓓蕾譯。1999。《精子戰爭》(Sperm Wars)。臺北:麥田。
Baker, W. et al. 1998. “Choosing a Sperm Donor: Comparison of Preferred Characteristics by Recipient Marital Status and Sexual Orientation,” in Fertility and Sterility-International Edition 70: P-190.
Banks, Marcus (班克斯) 著,林恩慧譯。2010。《質性研究的視覺資料運用》(Using Visual Data in Qualitative Research)。新北:韋伯文化。
Barthes, Roland. 1977. Image, Music, Text. Glasgow: Omnia Books.
Baudrillard, Jean (布希亞) 著,劉成富、全志鋼譯。2014。《消費社會》(La Société de Consommation)。南京:南京大學出版社。
Bauer, Martin W. and George Gaskell (包爾與加斯凱) 編,羅世宏、蔡欣怡、薛丹琦譯。2013。《質性資料分析:文本、影像與聲音》(Qualitative Researching with Text, Image and Sound: A Practical Handbook for Social Research)。臺北:五南。
Bauman, Zygmunt (鮑曼) 著,古蕾、胡欣譯。2018a。《廢棄社會:過剩消費、無用人口,我們都將淪為現代化的報廢物》(Wasted Lives: Modernity and Its Outcasts)。臺北:麥田。
——,陳雅馨譯。2018b。《液態現代性》(Liquid Modernity)。臺北:商周。
——,何定照、高瑟濡譯。2018c。《液態之愛》(Liquid Love: On the Frailty of Human Bonds)。臺北:商周。
Bay, Bjørn et al. 2014. “Danish Sperm Donors across Three Decades: Motivations and Attitudes,” in Fertility and Sterility 101 (1): 252-257.
Beck-Gernsheim, Elisabeth. 1990. “The Changing Duties of Parents: From Education to Bio-Engineering,” in International Social Science Journal 126: 451-463.
Bergen, Nicole and Céline Delacroix. 2017. “Bypassing the Sperm Bank: Documenting the Experiences of Online Informal Sperm Donors,” in Critical Public Health 29 (5): 584-595.
Berger, John (柏格) 著,吳莉君譯。2005。《觀看的方式》(Way of Seeing)。臺北:麥田。
BioÉthique. 2018. États Généraux de la bioéthique 2018. https://etatsgenerauxdelabioethique.fr/ (Date visited: April 29, 2020)
Blenstrup, Lene Tølbøll and Lisbeth B. Knudsen. 2011. “Danish Registers on Aspects of Reproduction,” in Scandinavian Journal of Public Health 39 (7): 79-82.
Bokek-Cohen, Ya’arit. 2014. “Becoming Familiar with Eternal Anonymity: How Sperm Banks Use Relationship Marketing Strategy,” in Consumption Markets&Culture 18: 155-177.
——. 2016a. “Jewish Law, Scarcity of Sperm Donors and the Consequent Private Import of Sperm of Non-Jews by Israeli Women,” in Gynecol Obstet Invest 81: 105-111.
——. 2016b. “A Visual Semiotic Analysis of Sperm Donors’ Baby Photos as Major Marketing Material at the s[u]premarket,” in Visual Communication 16 (2): 239-263.
Bokek-Cohen, Ya’arit and Limor Dina Gonen. 2015. “Sperm and Simulacra: Emotional Capitalism and Sperm Donation Industry,” in New Genetics and Society 34 (3): 243-273.
Boucai, Michael. 2016. “Is Assisted Procreation an LGBTQ Right?” in Wisconsin Law Review: 1065-1125. https://digitalcommons.law.buffalo.edu/journal_articles/index.html#year_2016 (Date visited: November 22, 2019)
Bourdieu, P. 1986. “The Forms of Capital,” in Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, edited by J. Richardson, pp. 241-258. New York: Greenwood.
——,劉暉譯。2019。《區分:判斷力的社會批判》(La Distinction Critique Sociale du Jugement)。北京:商務印書館。
Brase, Gary L. 2016. “The Relationship between Positive and Negative Attitudes towards Children and Reproductive Intentions,” in Personality and Individual Differences 90: 143-149.
Braun, Bruce. 2007. “Biopolitics and the Molecularization of Life,” in Cultural Geographies 14: 6-28.
Briggs, Laura. 2017. How All Politics Became Reproductive Politics. Oakland: University of California Press.
Buchanan, Allen, et al. (布坎南等) 著,蕭郁雯譯。2004。《從機會到選擇:遺傳學與正義》(From Chance to Choice: Genetics and Justice)。臺北:巨流。
Carney, Scott (卡尼) 著,姚宜平譯。2012。《人體交易:探尋全球器官掮客、骨頭小偷、血液農夫和兒童販子的蹤跡》(The Red Market: On the Trail of the World's Organ Brokers, Bone Thieves, Blood Farmers, and Child Traffickers)。臺北:麥田。
Chandra, Anjani et al. 2013. “Infertility Service Use among Fertility-Impaired Women in the United States: 1995-2010,” presented at the 2013 Annual Meeting of Population Association of America, New Orleans, U.S., April.
Cochrane, Emily. 2019/06/27. “Could Donor #2065 Be My Father?” The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/15/style/sperm-donation-fathers-day.html (Date visited: November 22, 2019)
Cohn, Naomi. 2013. The New Kinship: Constructing Donor-Conceived Families. New York: New York University Press.
Complete Fertility Centre Southampton. 2019. “Fertility Preservation for Members of the British Armed Forces.” https://www.completefertility.co.uk/fertility_preservation_british_armed_forces.php (Date visited: April 30, 2019)
Co-ParentMatch. 2019. “What Is Home Insemination?” https://www.co-parentmatch.com/home-insemination.aspx. (Date visited: April 29, 2019)
Crawshaw, Marilyn. 2018. “Commentary Direct-to-Consumer DNA Testing: The Fallout for Individuals and Their Families Unexpectedly Learning of Their Donor Conception Origins,” in Human Fertility 21 (4): 225-228.
Critser, John K. 1998. “Current Status of Semen Banking in the USA,” in Human Reproduction 13 (2): 55-66.
Cryos. 2016. “Egg Donation: Women in Central Jutland Are the Most Motivated in Denmark Regarding Egg Donation.” https://www.cryosinternational.com/da-dk/dk-shop/privat/om-os/presse/nyheder-og-pressemeddelelser/ (Date visited: January 20, 2020)
——. 2018a. 2018/03/16. “Cryos Continues to Ensure the Safety of Their Clients Cryopreserved Gametes,” PRWeb. https://www.prweb.com/releases/2018/03/prweb15319889.htm (Date visited: January 20, 2020)
——. 2018b. “New Board: Strong Capacities to Support Sperm Bank's Expansion and Internationalization.” https://www.cryosinternational.com/da-dk/dk-shop/privat/om-os/presse/nyheder-og-pressemeddelelser/ (Date visited: January 20, 2020)
Daar, Judith. 2017. The New Eugenics: Selective Breeding in an Era of Reproductive Technologies. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Daniels, Cynthia R. and Janet Golden. 2004. “Popular Eugenics, Artificial Insemination and the Rise of the American Sperm Banking Industry,” in Journal of Social History 38 (1): 5-27.
Daniels, Ken R. and Karyn Taylor. 1993. “Secrecy and Openness in Donor Insemination,” in Politics and the Life Sciences 12 (2): 155-170.
Danmarks Statistik. 2018. “Laveste Salg af Cigaretter siden 1961.”(1961年以來最低的捲菸銷售額) https://www.dst.dk/da/Statistik/nyt/NytHtml?cid=28986 (Date visited: April 28, 2020)
Dansk Fertilitetsselskab. 2018. “Fertility Awareness.” https://fertilitetsselskab.dk/fertility-awareness/ (Date visited: April 28, 2020)
Das, Divya. 2018/04/02. “Dansk Donorsæd er i Høj Kurs blandt Britiske Kvinder,” TV2. https://nyheder.tv2.dk/udland/2018-04-02-dansk-donorsaed-er-i-hoej-kurs-blandt-britiske-kvinder (Date visited: April 28, 2020)
Delaunay, Catarina. 2015. “The Beginning of Human Life at the Laboratory: The Challenges of a Technological Future for Human Reproduction,” in Technology in Society 40: 14-24.
Dixson, Barnaby J.W. et al. 2016. “The Masculinity Paradox: Facial Masculinity and Beardedness Interact to Determine Women's Ratings of Men's Facial Attractiveness,” in Journal of Evolutionary Biology 29 (11): 2311-2320.
Dominus, Susan. 2019/06/26. “Sperm Donors Can’t Stay Secret Anymore. Here’s What That Means,” The New York Times Magazine. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/26/magazine/sperm-donor-questions.html?action=click&auth=login-facebook&contentCollection=Magazine&contentID=WhatsNext&module=WhatsNext&moduleDetail=undefined&pgtype=Multimedia®ion=Footer&version=WhatsNext (Date visited: April 29, 2020)
Donohoe, Stephanie O’ et al. ed. 2014. Motherhoods, Markets and Consumption: The Making of Mothers in Contemporary Western Cultures. New York: Routledge.
Elster, Nanette R. 2005. “ART for the Masses? Racial and Ethnic Inequality in Assisted Reproductive Technologies,” in DePaul Journal of Health Care Law 9: 719-733.
European Institute for Gender Equality. 2020. “Gender Equality Index.” https://eige.europa.eu/gender-equality-index/2019/compare-countries/index/graph (Date visited: April 29, 2020)
European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. 2016. Homepage. https://www. eshre.eu/ (Date visited: October 1, 2016)
European Sperm Bank. 2019/04/04. “European Sperm Bank Is Entering a Partnership with Axcel,” Press. https://www.europeanspermbank.com/it/why-us/press.html (Date visited: May 15, 2019)
Fertility Center of California. 2019. “Pre-Deployment Fertility Preservation for Military Families.” https://www.spermbankcalifornia.com/military-sperm-bank.html (Date visited: April 30, 2019)
Frankel, Mark S. 1975. “Human-Semen Banking: Implications for Medicine and Society,” in Connecticut Medicine 39 (5): 313-317.
Frith, Lucy and Eric Blyth. 2014. “Assisted Reproductive Technology in the USA: Is More Regulation Needed?” in Reproductive Biomedicine Online 29 (4): 516-523.
Fromm, Erich (佛洛姆) 著,孫愷祥譯。2011。《健全的社會》(The Sane Society)。上海:譯文出版社。
Goddard, Joanna. 2017/11/13.“The One Thing That Surprised Me about Choosing a Sperm Donor,”A Cup of Jo. https://cupofjo.com/2017/11/choosing-a-sperm-donor/ (Date visited: April 19, 2019)
Golombok, Susan. 2015. Modern Families: Parents and Children in New Family Forms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Grand View Research. 2019. “Sperm Bank Market Size, Share, Global Industry Report, 2019-2025 (simple version).” https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/sperm-bank-market/toc (Date visited: April 22, 2019)
Hansen, Matilde. 2019/02/14. “Single Mother by Choice: From Career Goals to Baby Dreams,” ESB blog. https://blog.europeanspermbank.com/category/choosing-a-sperm-donor/ (Date visited: June 08, 2020)
Hanson, Clare (漢森) 著,章梅芳譯。2010。《懷孕文化史-懷孕、醫學和文化 (1750-2000)》(A Cultural History of Pregnancy: Pregnancy, Medicine and Culture, 1750-2000)。北京:北京大學出版社。
Harrison, Katherine. 2018. “A Virtual Promise of Happiness: Kinship on the Websites of Danish Fertility Clinics and Sperm Banks,” in Feminist Media Studies 19 (8): 1-18.
Hertz, Rosanna. 2002. “The Father as an Idea: A Challenge to Kinship Boundaries by Single Mothers,” in Symbolic Interaction 25 (1): 1-31.
——. 2008. Single by Chance, Mothers by Choice: How Women are Choosing Parenthood without Marriage and Creating the New American Family. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hertz, Rosanna and Margaret K. Nelson. 2019. Random Families: Genetic Strangers, Sperm Donor Siblings, and the Creation of New Kin. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Hewstone, Miles et al. (希斯通等) 編著,周海娟、郭盛哲、黃信洋譯。2013。《社會心理學:歐洲的觀點》(Introduction to Social Psychology: A European Perspective)。臺北:學富文化。
Houghton-Larsen, M. Annie. 2019. “I Paid for a White Baby: How Assisted Reproductive Reproduce White Supremacy,” in Georgetown Journal of Law&Modern, Critical Race Perspectives 11: 161-177.
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. 2019. Code of Practice. London: Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority.
Inhorn, Marcia C. 2015. Cosmopolitan Conceptions: IVF Sojourns in Global Dubai. Durham: Duke University Press.
Inhorn, Marcia C. and Pasquale Patrizio. 2009. “Rethinking Reproductive ‘Tourism’ as Reproductive ‘Exile’,” in Fertility and Sterility 92: 904-906.
——. 2015. “Infertility around the Globe: New Thinking on Gender, Reproductive Technologies, and Global Movements in the 21st Century,” in Human Reproduction Update 21 (4): 411-426
International Federation of Fertility Societies. 2013. “IFFS Surveillance 2013.” https://www.iffsreproduction.org/page/Surveillance (Date visited: March 12, 2019)
——. 2016. “IFFS Surveillance 2016,” in Global Reproductive Health 1 (e1): 1-143.
——. 2019. “IFFS Surveillance 2019,” in Global Reproductive Health 4 (e29): 1-138.
Jalbert, Pierre et al. 1989. “Genetic Aspects of Artificial Insemination with Donor Semen: The French CECOS Federation Guidelines,” in American Journal of Medical Genetics 33: 269-275.
Jasmine. 2016/04/05. 〈Made in Denmark:定製維京寶寶〉,《塞納筆記網誌》。https://qiujieblog.wordpress.com/2016/04/05/made-in-denmark-%E5%AE%9A%E5%88%B6%E7%BB%B4%E4%BA%AC%E5%AE%9D%E5%AE%9D/ (2017/8/23瀏覽)
Johnston, Josephine and Rachel L. Zacharias. 2017. “The Future of Reproductive Autonomy” in The Hastings Center Report 47 (S3): S2-S5.
Kafka, Franz (卡夫卡) 著,李毓昭譯。2016。《卡夫卡變形記》(Die Verwandlung)。臺北:晨星。
Kale, Sirin. 2015/10/02. “Women Are Now Pillaging Sperm Banks for Viking Babies,” VICE. https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/3dx9nj/women-are-now-pillaging-sperm-banks-for-viking-babies (Date visited: August 23, 2017)
Kanckos, Lise 2012. “Using Their Reproductive Autonomy or Buying Their Way Out of Moral Dilemmas? The Rhetorical Construction of Cross-Border Reproductive Travel in and from the Nordic Countries,” in Crisis and Change: Religion, Ethics and Theology under Late Modern Conditions, edited by Jan-Olav Henriksen and T. Kurtén, pp. 55-76. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Karlsdóttir, Anna et al. 2020. “Birth, Children and Young People,” in State of the Nordic Region 2020 (Chapter 2). Nordic Council of Ministers. https://pub.norden.org/nord2020-001/#15075 (Date visited: May 23, 2020)
Klotz, Maren. 2016. “Wayward Relations: Novel Searches of the Donor-Conceived for Genetic Kinship,” in Medical Anthropology 35 (1): 45-57.
Klotzko, Arlene Judith (克洛茲科) 著,師明睿譯。2004。《複製人的迷思:生殖複製vs醫療複製》(A Clone of Your Own?The Science and Ethics of Cloning)。臺北:天下。
Kroløkke, Charlotte. 2009. “Click a Donor: Viking Masculinity on the Line,” in Journal of Consumer Culture 9 (1): 7-30.
Kroløkke, Charlotte et al. 2020. The Cryopolitics of Reproduction on Ice: A New Scandinavian Ice Age. Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited.
Lasker, Judith N. 1993. “Doctors and Donors: A Comment on Secrecy and Openness in Donor Insemination,” in Politics and the Life Sciences 12 (2), 186-188.
Leiblum, Sandra Risa et al. “Non-Traditional Mothers: Single Heterosexual/Lesbian Women and Lesbian Couples Electing Motherhood via Donor Insemination,” in Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics and Gynaecology 16 (1): 11-20.
Lewak, Doree. 2020/05/16. “Not Even a Pandemic Can Stop the Sperminator from Spreading His Seed,” New York Post. https://nypost.com/2020/05/16/not-even-a-pandemic-can-stop-the-sperminator-from-spreading-his-seed/ (Date visited: June 03, 2020)
Lindstorm, Rebecca. 2020/05/20. “Supreme Court to Decide Whether Georgia Sperm Bank Can Be Sued in Potential Fraud Case,” Alive. https://www.11alive.com/article/news/investigations/the-reveal/georgia-xytex-sperm-bank-case-supreme-court/85-2516d438-4464-4158-a2db-4363be45100e (Date visited: June 22, 2020)
Martin, Lauren Jade. 2009. “Reproductive Tourism in the Age of Globalization,” in Globalizations 6: 249-263.
Mason, Mary Ann and Tom Ekman. 2017. Babies of Technology: Assisted Reproduction and the Rights of the Child. New Haven: Yale University Press.
McMillan, David W. and David M. Chavis. 1986. “Sense of Community: A Definition and Theory,” in Journal of Community Psychology 14 (1), 6-23.
MedlinePlus. 2020. “Cytomegalovirus Infections.” U.S. National Library of Medicine. https://medlineplus.gov/cytomegalovirusinfections.html (Date visited: April 22, 2020)
Miller, Amie Klempnauer. 2010. She Looks Just Like You: A Memoir of (Nonbiological Lesbian) Motherhood. Boston: Beacon Press.
Mohr, Sebastian. 2014. “Containing Sperm-Managing Legitimacy: Lust, Disgust, and Hybridity at Danish Sperm Banks,” in Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 45 (3): 319-342.
——. 2015. “Living Kinship Trouble: Danish Sperm Donors’ Narratives of Relatedness,” in Medical Anthropology: Cross-Cultural Studies in Health and Illness 34: 470-484.
——. 2018a. Being a Sperm Donor: Masculinity, Sexuality, and Biosociality in Denmark. New York: Berghahn Books.
——. 2018b. “Sperm Donors and the Biosociality of Gender: Masculinity and Sexuality in Times of Reproductive Biomedicine,” presented at SoA Lecture Series, Tucson, U.S., November. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:kau:diva-70063 (Date visited: September 6, 2019)
——. 2018c. “Aspiring towards Reproductive Masculinity : The Mobility of Donor Semen and the Regimes of Intimate (Im) Mobility at Danish Sperm Banks,” presented at Reproductive Aspirations and Trajectories within Movement/Settlement across Borders, Stockholm, Sweden, August.
Mohr, Sebastian and Lene Koch. 2016. “Transforming Social Contracts: The Social and Cultural History of IVF in Denmark,” in Reproductive Biomedicine and Society Online 2: 1-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rbms.2016.09.001 (Date visited: September 6, 2019)
Moore, Lisa Jean and Matthew Allen Schmidt. 1999. “On the Construction of Male Differences: Marketing Variations in Technosemen,” in Men and Masculinities 1 (4): 331-351.
Morse, Jennifer Roback. 2010. “Single Mother by Choice? Valid ‘Life-Style Choice’ or Another Example of Dumb Sex?” http://www.marriagelibrary.org/2010/01/single-mother-by-choice/ (Date visited: October 25, 2019)
Murray, Clare and Susan Golombok. 2005. “Going It Alone: Solo Mothers and Their Infants Conceived by Donor Insemination,” in American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 75: 242-253.
Murray, T. 1996. “New Reproductive Technologies and the Family,” in New Ways of Making Babies: National Advisory Board on Ethics in Reproduction, edited by C. B. Cohen, pp. 51-69. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Nilsson, Kjell and Johanna Carolina Jokinen. 2020. “Introduction,” in State of the Nordic Region 2020 (Chapter 1). Nordic Council of Ministers. https://pub.norden.org/nord2020-001/#14777 (Date visited: May 23, 2020)
Nordic Innovation. 2018. “Thematic Areas 2018-2021.” http://nordicinnovation.org/en-GB/projects/ (Date visited: May 20, 2019)
——. 2018/09/28. “Health, Demography and Quality of Life.” https://www.nordicinnovation.org/health (Date visited: May 20, 2019)
Nordic Innovation. 2019/03/18. “Funding Opportunities: Grants for Joint Nordic Health Events.” http://nordicinnovation.org/en-GB/projects/2319/health-demography-and-quality-of-life/funding-opportunity-grant-for-joint-nordic-health-events/ (Date visited: May 20, 2019)
Nordregio. 2020. “Labour Market,” in State of the Nordic Region 2020. Copenhagen: Nordic Council of Ministers. https://pub.norden.org/nord2020-001/#15088 (Date visited: May 20, 2019)
Nussbaum, Robert L. et al. 2001. Genetics in Medicine. Philadelphia: Saunders.
Ottey, Michelle. 2017. “An Introduction to Family Building with Donor Insemination.” Fairfax Cryobank. https://fairfaxcryobank.com/an-introduction-to-family-building-with-donor-insemination (Date visited: May 12, 2018)
Paivio, Allen. 1986. Mental Representations: A Dual Coding Approach. New York: Oxford University Press.
Partanen, Anu (帕特寧) 著,洪慧芳譯。2017。《北歐萬有理論:北歐人本vs美國夢,美好生活的終極探求》(The Nordic Theory of Everything: In Search of a Better Life)。新北:奇光出版。
Paul, Diane. 1994. “Eugenic Anxieties, Social Realities, and Political Choices,” in Are Genes Us? The Social Consequences of the New Genetics, edited by C. F. Cranor, pp.142-154. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
Payne, Jenny G. 2013. “Europeanizing Reproduction: Reproductive Technologies in Europe and Scandinavia,” in Nordic Journal of Feminist and Gender Research 21(3): 236-242.
Pennings, Guido. 2000. “The Right to Choose Your Donor: A Step towards Commercialization or a Step towards Empowering the Patient?” in Human Reproduction 15 (3): 508-514.
——. 2005. “Letter to the Editor-Reply: Reproductive Exile versus Reproductive Tourism.” in Human Reproduction and Embryology 20: 3571-3573.
——. 2010. “The Rough Guide to Insemination: Cross-Border Travelling for Donor Semen due to Different Regulations,” in Facts, Views&Vision in Obgyn: 55-60.
Perrin, Ellen C. et al. 2013. “Promoting the Well-Being of Children Whose Parents Are Gay or Lesbian,” in American Academy of Pediatrics 131 (4): e1374-e1383.
Petersen, Truls. ed. 2019. Legislation on Biotechnology in the Nordic Countries: An Overview 2019. Oslo: Nordic Committee on Bioethics.
Ping, Ping et al. 2011. Sperm Donation and Its Application in China: A 7-Year Multicenter Retrospective Study,” in Asian Journals of Andrology 13 (4): 644-648.
Plotz, David. 2006. The Genius Factory: The Curious History of the Nobel Prize Sperm Bank. New York: Random House Trade Paperbacks.
Pollock, Anne. 2003. “Complicating Power in High-Tech Reproduction: Narratives of Anonymous Paid Egg Donors,” in Journal of Medical Humanities 24: 241-263.
Präg, Patrick et al. 2017/10/13. “The Demographic Consequences of Assisted Reproductive Technologies.” SocArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/su49v (Date visited: July 22, 2018)
Quiroga, Seline Szkupinski. 2007. “Blood is Thicker than Water: Policing Donor Insemination and the Reproduction of Whiteness,” in Hypatia 22: 143-161.
Remennick, Larissa. 2006. “The Quest for the Perfect Baby: Why Do Israeli Women Seek Prenatal Genetic Testing,” in Sociology of Health&Illness 28 (1): 21-53.
——. 2010. “Between Reproductive Citizenship and Consumerism: Attitudes towards Assisted Reproductive Technologies among Jewish and Arab Israeli Women,” in Kin, Gene, Community: Reproductive Technologies among Jewish Israelis, edited by D. Birenbaum-Carmeli and Y. S. Carmeli. New York: Berghahn Books.
Robinson, Susan and Hank F. Pizer. 1985. Having a Baby without a Man: The Woman's Guide to Alternative Insemination. New York: Simon&Schuster Inc.
Rose, Nikolas. 2007. The Politics of Life Itself: Biomedicine, Power, and Subjectivity in the Twenty-First Century. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Rosenfeld, Michael J. 2007. The Age of Independence: Interracial Unions, Same Sex Unions, and the Changing American Family. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Rouquette, Pauline. 2020/01/20. “Loi Bioéthique: Que Teste-t-il du Projet de Loi Qui Arrive au Sénat?” France 24. https://www.france24.com/fr/20200120-loi-bio%C3%A9thique-que-reste-t-il-du-projet-de-loi-qui-arrive-au-s%C3%A9nat (Date visited: March 25, 2020)
Ryan-Flood, Róisín and Jenny G. Payne. ed. 2018. Transnationalising Reproduction: Third Party Conception in a Globalised World. Abingdon: Taylor&Francis Ltd.
Saward, Melanie. 2019/07/11. “Decolonising the Sperm Bank. Kill Your Darlings.” https://www.killyourdarlings.com.au/article/decolonising-the-sperm-bank/ (Date visited: March 25, 2020)
Sayer, Andrew (塞耶) 著,許甘霖、萬毓澤、楊友仁譯。2016。《社會科學的研究方法:批判實在論取徑》(Method in Social Science: A Realist Approach)。臺北:巨流圖書。
Schurr, Carolin. 2017. “From Biopolitics to Bioeconomies: The ART of (Re-) Producing White Futures in Mexico’s Surrogacy Market,” in Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 35 (2): 241-262.
——. 2018a. “Multiple Mobilities in Mexico’s Fertility Industry,” in Mobilities 14 (1): 1-17.
——. 2018b. “The Baby Business Booms: Economic Geographies of Assisted Reproduction,” in Geography Compass. https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12395 (Date visited: July 14, 2019)
Seibert, M. Therese and Willetts, Marion C. 2000. “Changing Family Forms,” in Social Education 64 (1): 42-47.
Sénat. 1994. “Statut des CECOS à l'Intérieur de l'Hôpital Public.” https://www.senat.fr/questions/base/1994/qSEQ940305469.html (Date visited: July 15, 2019)
Shenfield, Francoise et al. 2010. “Cross Border Reproductive Care in Six European Countries,” in Human Reproduction 25 (6): 1361-1368.
Sobande, Francesca et al. 2019. “Soldiers and Superheroes Needed! Masculine Archetypes and Constrained Bodily Commodification in the Sperm Donation Market,” in Marketing Theory 20 (1): 65-84.
Sollers, Philippe (索萊爾) 著,唐珍、郭海婷譯。2017。《十八世紀的自由》(Liberté du XVIIIe)。上海:華東師範大學出版社。
Spar, Debora L. 2006. The Baby Business: How Money, Science, and Politics Drive the Commerce Conception. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Speier, Amy. 2011. “Brokers, Consumers and the Internet: How North American Consumers Navigate Their Infertility Journeys,” in Reproductive BioMedicine Online 23: 592-599.
Statistics Denmark. “Names of Newborn Children.” https://www.dst.dk/en/Statistik/emner/befolkning-og-valg/navne/navne-til-nyfoedte# (Date visited: February 03, 2020)
Storrow, Richard F. 2005. “Quests for Conception: Fertility Tourists, Globalization and Feminist Legal Theory,” in Hastings Law Journey 57: 295-330.
Sullivan, Maureen. 2004. The Family of Woman: Lesbian Mothers, Their Children, and the Undoing of Gender. Berkeley: University of California.
Sun, Chia-Ting. 2019. “Reconsider Contemporary Capitalism through Reproductive Tourism,” in Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University (Sociology) 12 (1): 36-50.
Sundheds-og Ældreministeriet (衛生和老年人部). 1997/06/10. “Lov om Kunstig Befrugtning i Forbindelse med Lægelig Behandling, Diagnostik og Forskning m.v.”(在醫療、診斷和研究等方面進行人工授精之法令:第460號法令) Sundhedsmin. 1. kt., j.nr. 96-770-762. https://www.retsinformation.dk/Forms/R0710.aspx?id=84963 (Date visited: October 14, 2019)
——. 2006/08/06. “Lov om Ændring af Lov om Kunstig Befrugtning i Forbindelse med Lægelig Behandling, Diagnostik og Forskning m.v.”(修訂在醫療、診斷和研究等方面進行人工授精之法令:第535號法令) Indenrigs-og Sundhedsmin., j.nr. 2004-1660-29. https://www.retsinformation.dk/Forms/R0710.aspx?id=10291 (Date visited: October 14, 2019)
Sven, Bergmann. 2010. “Fertility Tourism: Circumventive Routes That Enable Access to Reproductive Technologies and Substances,” in Signs 36: 280-289.
——. “Reproductive Agency and Projects: Germans Searching for Egg Donation in Spain and the Czech Republic,” in Reproductive BioMedicine Online 23: 600-608.
Swanson, Kara W. 2012. “The Birth of the Sperm Bank,” in The Annals of Iowa 71: 241-276.
Tellis, Gerard J. 2004. Effective Advertising: Understanding When, How, and Why Adverstising Works. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
Testa, Maria Rita. 2014. “Women's Fertility Intentions and Level of Education: Why Are They Positively Correlated in Europe?” in Advances in Life Course Research 21: 28-42.
Testa, Maria Rita et al. 2016. “Are Daughters’ Childbearing Intentions Related to Their Mothers’ Socio-Economic Status?” in Demographic Research 35: 581-616.
Tober, Diane. 2018. Romancing the Sperm: Shifting Biopolitics and the Making of Modern Families. New Jersey: Rutgers University Press.
United Nations. 2018. “2018 International Day of Families.” https://www.un.org/development/desa/family/international-day-of-families/2018idf.html (Date visited: February 20, 2020)
Van Hoof, Wannes et al. 2015. “Cross-Border Reproductive Care for Law Evasion: A Qualitative Study into the Experiences and Moral Perspectives of French Women Who Go to Belgium for Treatment with Donor Sperm,” in Social Science&Medicine 124: 391-397.
Veblen, Thorstein. 1899. The Theory of the Leisure Class: An Economic Study of Institutions. London: Macmillan.
Wahlberg, Ayo. 2018. Good Quality: The Routinization of Sperm Banking in China. Berkley: University of California Press.
Wang, Chia-Huang. 2007. “Bio-Capitalism: A Marxist Critique,” in Taiwanese Journal for Studies of Science, Technology and Medicine 4: 17-64.
Weissenberg, Ruth et al. 2007. “Older Single Mothers Assisted by Sperm Donation and Their Children,” in Human Reproduction 22 (10): 2784-2791.
Wheatley, Alison. 2018. “Danish Sperm Donors and the Ethics of Donation and Selection,” in Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 21 (2): 227-238.
Whelan, Elizabeth. 1980. A Baby? ... Maybe: A Guide to Making the Most Fateful Decision of Your Life. New York: Macmillan Publishers Ltd.
Whittaker, Andrea. 2009. “Global Technologies and Transnational Reproduction in Thailand,” in Asian Studies Review 33: 319-332.
Woodward, Julia T. 2015. “Third-Party Reproduction in the Internet Age: The New, Patient-Centered Landscape,” in Fertility and Sterility 104 (3): 525-530.
World Health Organization. 2010. WHO Laboratory Manual for the Examination and Processing of Human Semen. Geneva: WHO Press.
——. 2018. Global Status Report on Alcohol and Health. Geneva: World Health Organization.
Wu, C. L. 2017. “From Single Motherhood to Queer Reproduction: Access Politics of Assisted Conception in Taiwan,” in Gender, Health, and History in Modern East Asia, pp.92-104, edited by A. K. C. Leung and I. Nakayama. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
Wulf, Christoph (武爾夫) 著,陳紅燕譯。2018。《人的圖像:想像、表演與文化》(Bilder des Menschen: Imaginäre und Performative Grundlagen der Kultur)。上海:華東師範大學出版社。
Zaltman, Gerald. 2003. How Customers Think: Essential Insights into the Mind of the Market. Boston: Harvard Business School.
Zillén, Kavot et al. 2017. The Rights of Children in Biomedicine: Challenges Posed by Scientific Advances and Uncertainties. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
QR Code
QRCODE