La intervención de ‘terceros’ en la producción de parentescoperspectiva de los/as donantes, las familias y la descendencia. Un estado de la cuestión

Referencias bibliográficas

• Alkorta, Itziar; Farnós, Esther (2017). «Anonimato del donante y derecho a conocer: un difícil equilibrio». Oñati Socio-legal Series [online], 7 (1): 48-178.
• Allan, Sonia (2016). «Donor identification: Victorian legislation gives rights to all onor-conceived people». Family Matters, (98), 43-55.
• Almeling, Rene (2006) .«´Why do you want to be a Donor?`: Gender and the roduction of Altruism in Egg and Sperm Donation». New Genetics and Society, 25(2): 143-157.
• Almeling, Rene (2007). «Selling genes, selling gender: Egg agencies, sperm banks, and the medical market in genetic material». American Sociological Review, 72(3): 319-340.
• Almeling, Rene (2009). «Gender and the value of bodily goods: Commodification in egg and sperm donation». Law & Contemporary Problems, 72(3): 37-58.
• Almeling, Rene (2011) Sex Cells: The Medical Market in Eggs and Sperm. Berkeley: University of California.
• Almeling, Rene (2014). «Defining Connections: Gender and Perceptions of Relatedness in Egg and Sperm Donation», en T. Freeman, S. Graham; F. Edetehaj et al. (Eds.) Relatedness in Assisted Reproduction: Families, Origins and Identities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Álvarez, Consuelo. (2008). La búsqueda de la eterna fertilidad. Mercantilismo y altruismo en la donación de semen y óvulos. Madrid: Alcalá Grupo Editoral.
• Ariza, Lucía (2016). «“No pagarás”: el Consentimiento Informado como productor de solidaridad en la medicina reproductiva». Ciencia, Docencia y Tecnología, 27 (52): 240-268.
• Baccino, Giuliana (2008). «¿Debe el niño nacido de una donación de gametos conocer su origen? Qué sugerimos como profesionales y por qué». Revista Iberoamericana de Fertilidad, 25 (1): 55-59.
• Bay, Bjorn; Larsen, Peter B.; Kesmodel, Ulrik S.; et al. (2014). «Danish sperm donors across three decades: motivations and attitudes». Fertility and Sterility, 101(1): 252-257.
• Beeson, Diane; Jennings, Patricia; Kramer, Wendy (2011). «Offspring searching for their sperm donors: How family type shapes the process». Human Reproduction 26 (9): 2415-2424.
• Berend, Zsuzsa (2012). «The Roman of Surrogacy». Sociological Forum, 27 (4): 913-936.
• Berend, Zsuzsa (2014) «The social context for surrogates’ motivations and satisfaction». Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 29: 399-401.
• Berend, Zsuzsa (2016). The Online World of Surrogacy. New York and Oxford: Berghahn.
• Berger, Roni; Paul, Marilyn (2008). «Family secrets and family functioning: The case of donor assistance». Family Process, 47(4): 553-566.
• Bestard, Joan (2004). Tras la biología: La moralidad del parentesco y las nuevas tecnologías de reproducción. Barcelona: Universitat de Barcelona.
• Bestard, Joan (2009). «Los hechos de la reproducción asistida: entre el esencialismo biológico y el constructivismo social». Revista de Antropología Social, 18: 83-95.
• Bestard, Joan; Orobitg, Gema; Ribot, Júlia; et al. (2003). Representación y reproducción asistida: cuerpo, persona y relaciones. Barcelona: Universitat de Barcelona.
• Bestard, Joan; Orobitg, Gema (2009). «Le paradoxe du don anonyme. Signification des dons d´ovules dans les procrétions médicalement assistées», en E. Porqueres I Géne (Coord.). Défis contemporains de la parenté. Paris: EHESS.
• Blyth, Eric (1994). «`I wanted to be interesting. I wanted to be able to say `I’ ve done something interesting with my life’: Interviews with surrogate mothers in Britain».Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology, 12:189-198.
• Blyth, Eric (2012). «Discovering The ‘Facts Of Life’ Following Anonymous Donor Insemination». International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 26 (2): 143-161.
• Blyth, Eric; Crawshaw, Marilyn; Lucy, Frith; et al. (2012). «Donor-Conceived People’s Views and Experiences of their Genetic Origins: A Critical Analysis of the Research Evidence», en S. Allan (Ed.), Special Edition of the Journal of Law and Medicine, 19 (4). (Forthcoming - July 2012).
• Bos, Henny; Gartrell, Nanette (2011). «Adolescents of the US National Longitudinal Lesbian Family Study: The impact of having a known or an unknown donor on the stability of psychological adjustment». Human Reproduction, 26: 630-637.
• Bosisio, Roberta; Ronfani, Paola (2016). «‘Who is in Your Family?’ Italian Children with Non-heterosexual Parents Talk about Growing Up in a Non-conventional Household». Children & Society, 30: 455-466.
• Bourdieu, P. (2003). Las estructuras sociales de la economía. Barcelona: Anagrama.
• Braverman, Andrea M.; Corson, Stephen L. (2002). «A comparison of oocyte donors’ and gestational carriers/surrogates’ attitudes towards third party reproduction». Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics, 19 (10): 462-469.
• Brewaeys, Anne; Ponjaert, Ingrid; Van Hall, E.V.; et al. (1997). «Donor insemination: child development and family functioning in lesbian mother families». Human Reproduction, 12 (6): 1349-1359.
• Burr, Jennifer; Reynolds, Paul. (2008). «Thinking ethically about genetic inheritance: liberal rights, communitarianism and the right to privacy for parents of donor insemination children». Journal of Medical Ethics, 34(4), 281-284.
• Byrd, Louise M.; Sidebotham, Mary; Lieberman, Brian (2002). «Egg donation - The donor’s view: An aid to future recruitment». Human Fertility, 5: 175-182.
• Cadoret, Anne (2004). «Pluriparentesco y familia de referencia», en D. Marre, J. Bestard (Eds.), La adopción y el acogimiento. Presente y perspectivas. Barcelona: Universitat de Barcelona, 273-283.
• Cadoret, Anne (2009). «Parentesco y figuras maternales. El recurso a una gestante subrogada por una pareja gay». Revista de Antropología Social, 18:67-82.
• Clemens, Rachel G.; Cushing, Amber L. (2010). «Beyond Everyday Life: Information Seeking Behavior in Deeply Meaningful and Profoundly Personal Contexts». Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 47:1-10.
• Cook, Rachel; Golombok, Susan (1995). «Ethics and society: A survey of semen donation: phase II - the view of the donors». Human Reproduction, 10 (4): 951-959.
• Cushing, Amber L. (2010). «I just want more informatio about who I am»: the search experience of sperm-donor offspring, searching for information about their donors and genetic heritage». Information Research, 15: paper 428.
• Daniels, Ken R. (1987). «Semen donors in New Zealand: their characteristics and attitudes». Clinical Reproduction and Fertility, 5 (4): 177-190.
• Daniels, Ken R. (1989). «Semen donors: their motivations and attitudes to their offspring». Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology, 7: 121-127.
• Daniels, Ken R.; Taylor, Karin (1993). «Secrecy and openness in donor insemination». Politics and the Life Sciences, 12:155-170.
• Daniels, Ken R.; Ericsson, H. L.; and Burn, I. P. (1996). «Families and donor insemination: the views of semen donors». International Journal of Social Welfare 5 (4): 229-237.
• Daniels, Ken; Thorn, Petra (2001). «Sharing information with donor insemination offspring: A child-conception versus a family-building approach». Human Reproduction, 16 (9): 1792-1796.
• Daniels, Ken R.; Kramer, Wendy; Perez-y-Perez, Maria Victoria (2012). «Semen donors who are open to contact with their offspring: issues and implications for them and their families». Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 25 (7): 670-677.
• Delaisi de Parseval, Geneviève; Collard, Chantal (2007). «La gestation pour autrui Un bricolage des représentations de la paternité et de la maternité euro-américaines». L’Homme, 3 (183): 29-53.;
• Díez, Marta (2015). Familias de madres solas por elección como contexto para el desarrollo infantil. Tesis doctoral. Facultad de Psicología. Universidad de Sevilla.
• Durán, Ramón (2010). «Anonimato del progenitor y derecho a la identidad del hijo. Decisiones judiciales encontradas sobre reserva de identidad en los casos de madre soltera y donante de esperma». Ius et Praxis, 16, 1: 3-54.
• Edwards, Jeanette; Franklin, Sara; Hirsch, Eric; et al. (1993). Technologies of Procreation: Kinship in the Age of Assisted Conception. Manchester University Press: Manchester.
• Edwards, Jeanette (2000). Born and Bred. Idioms of Kinship and New Reproductives Technologies in England. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
• Edwards, Jeanette; Salazar, Carles (Eds.) (2009). European Kinship in the Age of Biotechnology. Berghahn Books.
• Ekerhovd, Erling; Faurskov, Anders (2008). «Swedish sperm donors are driven by altruism, but shortage of sperm donors leads to reproductive travelling.» Upsala Journal of Medical Sciences 113 (3): 305-314.
• European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) (2016). «Assisted reproductive technology in Europe, 2012: results generated from European registers by ESHRE», Human Reproduction, 31 (8): 1638-1652.
• Farnós, Esther (2015). «Anonimato del donante y derecho a conocer: un difícil equilibrio», Workshop sobre Derechos reproductivos y reproducción asistida. Género, diversidad sexual y familias en plural, International Institute for the Sociology of Law, Oñati (Gipuzkoa).
• Fielding, Dorothy; Handley Sarah; Duqueno, Lindsay; et al. (1998). «Motivation, attitudes and experience of donation: a follow-up of women donating eggs in assisted conception treatment». Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology. 8 (4): 273-87.
• Fitó, Carme (2010). Identidad, cuerpo y parentesco. Etnografía sobre la experiencia de la infertilidad y la reproducción asistida en Cataluña. Barcelona: Bellaterra.
• Flaks, David K.; Ficher, Ilda, Masterpasqua, Frank; Joseph, Gregory (1995). «Lesbians choosing motherhood: A comparative study of lesbian and heterosexual parents and their children». Developmental Psychology, 31(1): 105-114.
• Franklin, Sarah (1997). Embodied Progress. A Cultural Account of Assisted Conception. Londres: Routledge.
• Franklin, Sarah (2003). «Rethinking nature-culture. Anthropology and the new genetics». Anthropology Theory, 3 (1): 65-85.
• Freeman, Tabitha; Golombok, Susan (2012). «Donor insemination: A follow-up study of disclosure decisions, family relationships and child adjustment at adolescence». Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 25: 193-203.
• Freeman, Tabitha; Graham, Susanna; Ebthaj, Fatemeh; et al. (2014). Relatdness in Assisted Reproduction. Families, Origins and Identities. Cambridge University Press.
• Gartrell, Nanette; Deck, Amalia; Rodas, Carla; et al. (2005). «The National Lesbian Family Study: 4. Interviews With the 10-Year-Old Children». American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 75 (4): 518-524.
• Godman, Kate; Sanders, Katherine; Rosenberg, Michael; et al. (2006). «Potential Sperm Donors’, Recipients’ and their Partners’ opinions towards the Release of Identifying Information in Western Australia». Human Reproduction, 21:3022-3026.
• Goldberg, Abbie E.; Allen, Katherine R. (2013). «Donor, dad, or…? Young adults with lesbian parents’ experiences with known donors». Family Process, 52: 338-350.
• Golombok, Susan; Cook, Rachel; Bish, Alison; et al. (1995). «Families Created by the New Reproductive Technologies: Quality of Parenting and Social and Emotional Development of the Children». Child Development, 66 (2): 285-298.
• Golombok, Susan; Badger, Shirlene (2010). «Children raised in mother-headed families from infancy: a follow-up of children of lesbian and single heterosexual mothers, at early adulthood». Human Reproduction, 25(1):150-157.
• Golombok, Susan (2012). «Nuevas formas familiares», en R. Estinau (Coord.), La nueva generación social de familias. Tecnologías de reproducción asistida y temas contemporáneos. México: CIESAS, 43-74.
• Golombok, Susan; Ilioi, Elena; Blake, Lucy; et al. (2017). «A longitudinal study of families formed through reproductive donation: Parent-adolescent relationships and adolescent adjustment at age 14». Developmental Psychology, 53(10): 1966-1977.
• Gottlieb, Claes; Lalos, Othon; Lindblad, Frank (2000). «Disclosure of donor insemination to the child: the impact of Swedish legislation on couples’ attitudes». Human Reproduction, 15 (9): 2052-2056.
• Graham, Susanna; Jadva, Vasanti; Freeman, Tabitha; et al. (2016). «Being an identity-release donor: a qualitative study exploring the motivations, experiences and future expectations of current UK egg donors». Human Fertility, 19 (4): 230-241.
• Grau, Jordi (2010). «Parentesco e identidad. Debates recientes en torno al binomio naturaleza cultura. ¿Rebiologización o reideologización del parentesco?», en R. Díaz y A. González (Coords.) Naturalezas, cuerpos, culturas. Metamorfosis e intersecciones. México: Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana, 81-111.
• Harper, Joyce; Kennett, Debbie; Reisel, Dan (2016). «The end of donor anonymity: how genetic testing is likely to drive anonymous gamete donation out of business». Human Reproduction, 31(6): 1135-1140.
• Hertz, Rosanna; Nelson, Margaret; Kramer, Wendy (2013). «Donor conceived offspring conceive of the donor: The relevance of age, awareness, and family form». Social Science & Medicine, 86: 52– 65.
• Igareda, Noelia (2015). «El derecho a conocer los orígenes biológicos vs el anonimato en la donación de gametos». Workshop sobre Derechos reproductivos y reproducción asistida. Género, diversidad sexual y familias en plural, International Institute for the Sociology of Law, Oñati (Gipuzkoa).
• Isaksson, Stina; Sydsjö, Gunilla; Svanberg, Agneta S.; et al. (2014). «Preferences and needs regarding future contact with donation offspring among identity-release gamete donors: results from the Swedish Study on Gamete Donation», Mental Health, Sexuality, and Ethics, 102 (4): 1160-1166.
• Jacobson, Heather (2016). Labor of gove: gestational surrogacy and the work of making babies. New Brunswick, New Jersey and London: Rutgers University Press.
• Jadva, Vasanti; Murray, Clare; Lycett, Emma; et al. (2003) «Surrogacy: the experiences of surrogate mothers». Human Reproduction, 18 (10): 2196-2204.
• Jadva, Vasanti; Freeman, Tabitha; Kramer, Wendy; et al. (2009). «The experiences of adolescents and adults conceived by sperm donation: comparisons by age of disclosure and family type». Human Reproduction, 24(8): 1909-1919.
• Jadva, Vasanti; Freeman, Tabitha; Kramer, Wendy; et al. (2010a) «Sperm and oocyte donors’ experiences of anonymous donation and subsequent contact with their donor offspring». Human Reproduction, 26 (3): 638-645.
• Jadva, Vasanti; Freeman, Tabitha; Kramer, Wendy; et al. (2010b). «Experiences of offspring searching for and contacting their donor siblings and donor». Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 20(4): 523-532.
• Jadva, Vasanti; Blake, Lucy; Casey, Polly; et al. (2012). «Surrogacy families 10 years on: Relationship with the surrogate, dcisions over disclosure and children´s understanding of their surrogacy». Human Reproduction, 27 (10): 3008-3014.
• Jadva, Vasanti; Imrie, Susan; Golombok, Susan (2015). «Surrogate mothers 10 years on: a longitudinal study of psychological well-being and relationships with the parents and child». Human Reproduction, 30 (2): 373-379.
• Janssens, Pim; Thorn, Petra; Castilla, Jose; et al. (2015). «Evolving minimum standards in responsible international sperm donor offspring quota». Reproductive biomedicine online, 30(6): 568-580.
• Jociles, Mª Isabel; Poveda, David; Rivas, Ana Mª (2013). «Experiencias e imágenes acerca de su familia de los hijos de madres solteras por elección (MSPE) y de familias biparentales», en M.I. Jociles (Ed.), La monoparentalidad por elección: la construcción de un modelo de familia. Valencia: Tirant lo Blanc, 41-67.
• Jociles, Mª Isabel; Rivas, Ana Mª; Poveda, David (2014). «Monoparentalidad por elección y revelación de los orígenes a los hijos/as nacidos por donación de gametos». Convergencia. Revista de Ciencias Sociales, 21 (65): 65-91.
• Jociles, Mª Isabel (Ed.) (2016). Revelaciones, filiaciones y biotecnologías. Una etnografía sobre la comunicación de los orígenes a los hijos e hijas concebidos mediante donación reproductiva. Barcelona: Ediciones Bellaterra.
• Jociles, Mª Isabel; Rivas, Ana Mª (2016). «Cambios en la concepción y representación del parentesco a raíz del uso de las técnicas de reproducción asistida con donante» .Ankulegi. Revista de Antropología Social, 20: 63-78.
• Joyce, Harper; Kennett, Debbie; Reisel, Dan (2016). «The end of donor anonymity: how genetic testing is likely to drive anonymous gamete donation out of business». Human Reproduction, 31(6): 1135-1140.
• Kalfoglou, Andrea; Gittelsohn, Joel (2000). «A qualitative follow-up study of women’s experiences with ooctye donation». Human Reproduction, 15: 798-805.
• Kirkman, Maggie (2003a).«Egg and Embryo Donation and the Meaning of Motherhood». Women & Health, Volume 38, (2): 1-18.
• Kirkman, Maggie (2003b). «Parents’ contributions to the narrative identity of offspring of donor-assisted conception ». Social Science and Medicine, 57: 2229-2242.
• Kirkman, Maggie (2004). «Genetic Connection and Relationships in Narratives Of Donor-Assisted Conception». Australian Journal of Emerging Technologies and Society, 2 (1): 1-20.
• Klock, Susan C.; Stout, Jan E; Davidson, Marie (2003). «Psychological characteristics and factors related to willingness to donate again among anonymous oocyte donors». Fertility and Sterility, 79, 6: 1312-1316.
• Lafuente, Sara (2017). Bioeconomías reproductivas: los óvulos en la biología pos fecundación in vitro. Tesis doctoral. Facultad de Ciencias Políticas y Sociología. Universidad Complutense.
• Lampic, Claudia; Svanberg, Agneta; Sydsjö, Gunilla (2014). «Attitudes towards disclosure and relationship to donor offspring among a national cohort of identity-release oocyte and sperm donors». Human Reproduction, 29 (9): 1978-86.
• Lance, Delphine (2017).«Mettre à distance la maternité: La gestation pour autrui en Ukraine et aux États-Unis». Ethnologie française, 167 (3): 409-420.
• Landau, Ruth; Weissenberg, Ruth (2010). «Disclosure of donor conception in single-mother families: views and concerns». Human Reproduction, 25 (4): 942-948.
• Leiblum, Sandra; Palmer, Matilde; Spector, Ilana (1995). «Non-traditional mothers: Single heterosexual women/lesbian women and lesbian couples electing motherhood via donor insemination». Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics and Gynecology, 16: 11-20.
• Lertxundi, Roberto; De los Reyes, Silvia; Haya, Javier (2001). «Donación de gametos», en C. Buil; I. Lete; R, Ros; et al. (Coords.) Manual de salud reproductiva en la adolescencia. Aspectos básicos y clínicos. Zaragoza, Sociedad Española de Contracepción, 851-865.
• Lycett, Enma; Daniels, Ken; Curson, Ruth; et al. (2005). «School-aged children of donor insemination: a study of parents’ disclosure patterns». Human Reproduction, 20 (3): 810- 819.
• Lucía, Cristina; Nuñez, Rocío (2015). «Revisión del perfil sociodemográfico de una muestra local de donantes de gametos, en España: motivación para la donación, procedencia de los donantes, ocupación». Medicina Reproductiva y Embriología Clínica.
• Mahlstedt, Patricia P.; LaBounty, Kathleen; Kennedy, William T. (2010). «The views of adult offspring of sperm donation: essential feedback for the development of ethical guidelines within the practice of assisted reproductive technology in the United States». Fertility and Sterility, 93 (7): 2236-2246.
• Malmquist, Anna; Möllerstrand, Anna; Wikström, Maria; et al. (2014) «‘A daddy is the same as a mummy’: Swedish children in lesbian households talk about fathers and donors». Childhood, 21: 119-133.
• Molas Anna; Bestard Joan (2017). «En Espagne, le don d’ovules entre intérêt, solidarité et précarité». Ethnologie française, 167, 3: 491-498.
• Mohr, Sebastian (2014). «Beyond motivation: On what it means to be a sperm donor in Denmark». Anthropology & Medicine, 21 (2):162-173.
• Mohr, Sebastian (2015). «Living Kinship Trouble: Danish Sperm Donors’ Narratives of Relatedness». Medical Anthropology, 34(5): 470-484.
• Moscoso, Mª Fernanda; Jociles, Mª Isabel; Poveda, David; et al. (2016). «La revelación de los orígenes desde la perspectiva de los niños y niñas nacidos por donación de gametos», en M.I. Jociles (Ed.), Revelaciones, filiaciones y biotecnologías. Una etnografía de la comunicación sobre los orígenes a los hijos e hijas concebidos mediante donación reproductiva. Barcelona: Bellaterra, 37-68.
• Murray, Clare; Golombok, Susan (2005). «Solo mothers and their donor insemination infants Follow-up at age 2 years». Human Reproduction, 20 (6):1655-1660.
• Nelson, Margaret K.; Hertz, Rosanna; Kramer, Wendy (2013). «Making Sense of Donors and Donor Siblings: A Comparison of the Perceptions of Donor-Conceived Offspring in Lesbian-Parent and Heterosexual-Parent Families,» in S. L. Blair; P. N. Claster (Coords.), Visions of the 21st Century Family: Transforming Structures and Identities. Contemporary Perspectives in Family Research, Emerald Group Publishing Limited 13:1-42.
• Olavarría, Mª Eugenia (coord.) (2013). Parentescos en plural. México: Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana.
• Orobitg, Gemma; Salazar, Carles (2005). «The gift of motherhood: Egg donation in a Barcelona infertility clinic», Ethnos, 70 (1): 31-52.
• Orobitg, Gemma; Bestard, Joan; Salazar, Carles (2013). «El cuerpo (re) productivo. Interés económico y altruismo social en las experiencias de un grupo de mujeres donantes de óvulos». Revista Andaluza de Antropología, 5: 91-104.
• Pande, Amrita (2011). «Transnational commercial surrogacy in India: gifts for global sisters?». Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 23: 618– 625
• Pande, Amrita (2015).«Blood, Sweat and Dummy Tummies: Kin Labour and transnational Surrogacy in India». Anthropologica, 1: 53-62.
• Pennings, Guido; De Mouzon, J.; Shenfield, F.; et al. (2014). «Socio-demographic and fertility-related characteristics and motivations of oocyte donors in eleven European countries». Human Reproduction, 29(5), 1076-1089.
• Pennings, Guido (2017). «Disclosure of donor conception, age of disclosure and the well- being of donor offspring». Human Reproduction, 32:969-973.
• Perlesz, Amaryll, Brown, Rhonda, Lindsay, Jo; et al. (2006). «Family in transition: parents, children and grandparents in lesbian families give meaning to ‘doing family’». Journal of Family Therapy, 28: 175-199.
• Persaud, Sherina; Freeman, Tabitha; Jadva, Vasanti; et al. (2017). «Adolescents Conceived through Donor Insemination in Mother-Headed Families: A Qualitative Study of Motivations and Experiences of Contacting and Meeting Same-donor Offspring». Children & Society, 31: 13-22.
• Porqueres, Enric (Ed.) (2009). Défis contemporains de la parenté. Paris: EHESS.
• Poveda, David; Jociles, Mª Isabel; Rivas, Ana Mª (2011). «Monoparentalidad por elección: procesos de socialización de los hijos/as en un modelo familiar no convencional». Athenea Digital, 11(2): 133-154.
• Poveda, David; Jociles Mª Isabel; González-Patiño, Javier (2015). Deseos, hadas, magos y semillas: cuentos para comunicar los orígenes en familias que han acudido a la donación reproductiva. Madrid: Mediática.
• Poveda, David; Moscoso, Mª Fernanda y Jociles, Mª Isabel (2018). «From Refl to Normalization: Parents and Children Confronting Disclosure in Families Formed Through Assisted Reproduction Involving Gamete Donation». Human Organization 77 (1), 10-21.
• Raes, Inez; Van Parys, Hanna; Provoost, Veerle; et al. (2015). «Two mothers and a donor: Exploration of children’s family concepts in lesbian households». Facts, Views & Vision in ObGyn, 7, 83-90.
• Ragoné, Helena (1994). Surrogate Motherhood: Conception in the heart. Westview Press: Oxford.
• Ravelingien, An; Provoost, Veerle; Pennings, Guido (2013). «Donor-conceived children looking for their sperm donor: what do they want to know?» Facts, Views & Visions in ObGyn, 5 (4): 257-264.
• Ravelingien, An; Provoost, Veerle; Pennings, Guido (2015). «Open-identity sperm donation: how does offering donor-identifying information relate to donor-conceived offspring’s wishes and needs?». Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 12(3): 503-509.
• Richards, Martin; Pennings, Guido; Appleby, John B. (2012). Reproductive Donation. Practice, Policy and Bioethics. Cambridge University Press.
• Rodino, Iolanda S.; Burton, P.J.; Sanders, Kathy A. (2011). «Donor information considered important to donors, recipients and offspring: an Australian perspective». Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 22: 03– 311.
• Salazar, Carles (2004). «Repensar la consanguinidad», en D. Marre y J Bestard (Coords.), La adopción y el acogimiento. Presente y perspectivas. Barcelona: Universitat de Barcelona, 313-335.
• Salazar, Carles (2009) «Are Genes Good to Think With?», en J. Edwards y C. Salazar (Eds.) European Kinship in the Age of Biotechnology. Berghahn Books, 179-196.
• Salter-Ling, Natacha; Hunter, Myra; Glover, Lesley (2001). «Donor insemination: exploring the experience of treatment and intention to tell». Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology, 19(3): 175-186.
• Sauer, Mark; Gorrill, M. J., Zeffer, Kirsten; et al. (1989). «Attitudinal survey of sperm donors to an artificial insemination clinic». Journal of Reproductive Medicine, 34 (5): 362-364.
• Scheib, Joanna; Riordan, Maura; Rubin, Susan (2003). «Choosing identity-release sperm donors: The parents´ perspective 13-18 years later». Human Reproduction, 18(5): 115-1127.
• Scheib, Joanna E.; Riordan, Maura; Rubin, Susan (2005). «Adolescents with open-identity sperm donors: reports from 12-17 year olds». Human Reproduction, 20: 239-252.
• Schneider, David M. (1984). A Critique of the Study of Kinship. Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press.
• Schover, L.R.; Rothmann S.A.; Collins, R.L. (1992). «The personality and motivation of semen donors: a comparison with oocyte donors», Human Reproduction, 7, 4, (1): 575-579.
• Slutsky, Jenna; Jadva, Vasanti; Freeman, Tabitha and Persaud, Sherina (2016). «Integrating donor conception into identity development: adolescents in fatherless families». Fertility and Sterility, 106 (1): 0015-0282.
• Smietana, Marcin (2017). «Affective De-Commodifying, Economic De-Kinning: Surrogates’ and Gay Fathers’ Narratives in U.S. Surrogacy». Sociological Research Online, 22 (2), 5.
• Snowden, Robert (1990). «The family and artificial reproduction», en A. Bromham (Ed.), Philosophical Ethics in Reproductive Medicine. Manchester University Press.
• Sociedad Española de Fertilidad (SEF) (2014). Registro Nacional de actividad. Informe estadístico de Técnicas de Reproducción Asistida.
• Strathern, Marilyn (1992a). After Nature. English Kinship in the Late Twentieth Century. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge
• Strathern, Marilyn (1992b) Reproducing the Future. Essays on Anthropology, Kinship and the New Reproductive Technologies. Manchester University Press: Manchester.
• Svanberg, Agneta S.; Lampic, Claudia; Bergh, Torbjörn; et al. (2003) «Characterisation of potential oocyte donors in Sweden». Human Reproduction. 18:2205-2215.
• Tasker, Fiona; Granville, Julia (2011). «Children’s views of family relationships in lesbian- led families». Journal of GLBT Family Studies, 7: 182-199.
• Teman, Elly (2010). Birthing a Mother: the Surrogate Body and the Pregnant Self. University of California Press: Berkeley.
• Théry, Irène (2009). «El anonimato en las donaciones de engendramiento: Filiación e identidad narrativa infantil en tiempos de descasamiento». Revista de Antropología Social, 18: 21-42.
• Thompson, C. (2005). Making Parents. The Ontological Choreography of Reproductive Technologies. Cambridge, MIT Press.
• Thorn, Petra;, Katzorke, Thomas; Daniels, Ken (2008).»Semen donors in Germany: A study exploring motivations and attitudes». Human Reproduction, 23(11): 2415–2420.
• Tober, Diane (2001). «Reproductive Workers and the Market in Altruism». Body & Society, 7 (2-3): 137-160.
• Turner, Amanda J.; Coyle, Adrian (2000). «What does it mean to be a donor offspring? The identity experiences of adults conceived by donor insemination and the implications for counselling and therapy». Human Reproduction, 15: 2041-2051.
• Vanfraussen, Katrien; Ponjaert-Kristoffersen, Ingrid; Brewaeys, Anne (2001). «An attempt to reconstruct children’s donor concept: A comparison between children’s and lesbian parents’ attitudes towards donor anonymity». Human Reproduction, 16: 2019-2025.
• Vanfraussen, Katrien; Ponjaert-Kristoffersen, Ingrid; Brewaeys, Anne (2002). «What does it mean for youngsters to grow up in a lesbian family created by means of donor insemination?». Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology, 20 (4): 237-242.
• Vanfraussen, Katrien; Ponjaert-Kristoffersen, Ingrid; Brewaeys, Anne (2003). «Why do children want to know more about the donor? The experiences of youngsters raised in lesbian families». Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics & Gynecology, 24: 31-38.
• Van Gelderen, Loes; Bos, Henny M. W.; Gartrell, Nanette; et al. (2012). «Quality of Life of Adolescents Raised from Birth by Lesbian Mothers: The US National Longitudinal Family Study». Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics, 33:1-7.
• Van Parys, Hanna; Provoost, Veerle; Wyverkens, Elia; et al. (2015). «Family Communication About the Donor Conception: A Multi-Perspective Qualitative Study With Lesbian Parents and Their Children». Qualitative Health Research, 26 (14):1998-2008.
• Warren, Narelle; Blood, Jenny (2003). «Who donates? Why donate? An exploration of the characteristics and motivations of known egg donors: the Victoria, Australia experience». Journal of Fertility Counselling, 10 (3): 20-24.
• Wheatley, Alison (2010). «Donor insemination: the role of the Internet in the experiences of donor offspring, DI parents and donors». Reinvention: an International Journal of Undergraduate Research, 3. http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/cross_fac/iatl/ejournal/ issues/volume3issue2/wh eatley
• Zadeh, Sophie; Freeman, Tabitha; Golombok, Susan (2015). «Absence or presence? Complexities in the donor narratives of single mothers using sperm donation». Human Reproduction, 31(1):117-124.
• Zadeh, Sophie; Freeman, Tabitha; Golombok, Susan (2016). ‘What Does Donor Mean to a Four-Year-Old?’: Initial Insights intoYoung Children’s Perspectives in Solo Mother Families». Children & Society, 31: 194-205
• Zadeh, Sophie; Jones, C.M.; Basi, T.; et al. (2017). «Children’s thoughts and feelings about their donor and security of attachment to their solo mothers in middle childhood». Human Reproduction, 32 (4): 868-875.