dc.contributor.author | TAYLOR ARMSTRONG, Sylvie Grace | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-04-27T07:38:18Z | |
dc.date.available | 2021-04-27T07:38:18Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2021 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Journal of gender studies, 2021,Vol. 30, No. 7, pp. 864-867 | en |
dc.identifier.issn | 0958-9236 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 1465-3869 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/1814/70935 | |
dc.description | First published: 13 April 2021 | en |
dc.description.abstract | Though commercial surrogates are paid for providing a service, there is systemic reluctance to characterize these arrangements as ‘work’. No jurisdiction in the world currently uses a labour law model to regulate this practice. Perhaps more significantly, research has found that industry narratives in popular commercial destinations including Georgia, California, and (formerly) India are constructed around expectations of altruism, which distance surrogates from their identity as workers even when paid. This contribution explores one aspect of this: the practical concern that normalizing contract pregnancy will cause it to become a mainstream solution to unemployment. It is argued that this assumption is a further manifestation of the ‘devaluation thesis’ already experienced by reproductive labourers. Once unpicked, it becomes apparent that surrogacy is not a role that can be successfully performed by anyone with a uterus. With proper screening, this concern could be managed. | en |
dc.language.iso | en | en |
dc.publisher | Routledge | en |
dc.relation.ispartof | Journal of gender studies | en |
dc.title | Surrogacy : time we recognized it as a job? | en |
dc.type | Article | en |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1080/09589236.2021.1915754 | |
dc.identifier.volume | 30 | |
dc.identifier.startpage | 864 | |
dc.identifier.endpage | 867 | |
eui.subscribe.skip | true | |
dc.identifier.issue | 7 | |