Abstract
The desire for genetically related children is driving an exponential rise in assisted reproductive service provision worldwide, including the Global South. In India, the number of ART (Assisted Reproductive Technology) clinics has more than doubled over the past three years. This expansion has been accompanied by a similarly explosive growth in populist narratives that assert that one of the services offered by such clinics, commercial gestational surrogacy (CGS), is a form of labour that is so exceptional(ly) exploitative it should be banned. Provocative headlines proclaiming that surrogates are ‘Renting their wombs’ and ‘Pimping their pregnancies’ fuel such assertions, suggesting that surrogates become reduced to mere wombs, vessels for carrying the offspring of entitled and wealthy foreigners. Although superficially compelling, such arguments fail to withstand detailed interrogation. Utilizing insights from anthropology, the history of science and law and bringing to bear the findings of extended fieldwork in Mumbai, Jaipur and Delhi, I critically analyse three assertions made in relation to surrogacy: that it is (i) a particularly intimate or invasive form of bodily exploitation; (ii) a uniquely sacralized form of affective labour and (iii) a uniquely generative form of labour. In arguing against exceptionalism, I contend that such practices cannot be adjudged through application of universal ethical principles and norms, but rather must take account of the complexity of the lived experience of all the participants, placed in their sociological and geographical contexts.
Highlights
A distinct advantage of approaching research on new human reproductive technologies via the history of animal and plant modification is the ability it affords to recognize that for every apparently ‘unprecedented’ development in the engineering of biological life there is, if not a precedent, at least a significant precursor
The recent ban on the offering of commercial surrogacy services in India today is predicated on the argument that the practice is highly exploitative of the women involved – we must presume, uniquely exploitative, since it is this practice alone amongst various kinds of clinical labour that has been criminalized and singled out for prohibition
Much interest has been concentrated on surrogacy as a form of exceptionally exploitative reproductive labour that ought, by some accounts, to be banned outright
Summary
A distinct advantage of approaching research on new human reproductive technologies via the history of animal and plant modification is the ability it affords to recognize that for every apparently ‘unprecedented’ development in the engineering of biological life there is, if not a precedent, at least a significant precursor. There proves to be more commensurabilities between the work of gestating children and other forms of bodily, affective or generative labour than we first might have imagined, it must be the conditions under which this reproductive labour is performed that serve to make it so exceptionally exploitative, such an affront to moral dignity.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
