DOCSLIB.ORG

Rethinking Reproductive Freedom

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Rethinking Reproductive Freedom RETHINKING REPRODUCTIVE FfiEEDOhI: IX-VITRB FERTILIZATION AND A WOh.lAi"tl'S SIGHT TO CHOOSE Vaf da Dohlen B.A., University of Regina 1988 Honours Certificate, University of Regma 1990 THESIS SUBMTTTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUmhENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in the Depal-tment ot Women's Studies O Valda N. Dohlen 1992 SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY July 1992 rights reserved. "This work may not be reproduced in xvE,ole or in part, by photocopy or otkr means, without permissio~iof the author. Acquisitions and L?iredion des acquisitions et Bibtiographic Sewices Branch des sewices brbi!ographrqt;es The author has granted an t'autetnr a accord@ une iicen~e irrevocable non-exclusive licence irrevocabfe et non exclusive allowing the National Library of perrnettant la Bibliothbque Canada to reproduce, loan, nationale du Canada de distribute or sell copies sf reproduire, preter, distribuer ou -- his/her thesis by any means and vendre des copies de sa these in any form or format, making de quelque rnaniere et sovs this thesis available to interested queique forme que ce soit pour persons. mettre des exemplaires de cette these 6 la disposition des personnes interessees. The author retains ownership of L'auteur conserve la propri6lb du the copyright in his/her thesis. droit d'auteur qui protege sa Neither the thesis nor substantial these. Ni la thhse ni des extraits extracts from it may be printed or substantiels de celte-ci ne otherwise reproduced without doivent etre imprimes ou hisfher permission. autrement repreduits sans son - autorisation. Name: Vaida Dohiert Degree: 34as:er of Arts Title of*Thesis: Rethinking Kep:odttcrit.s Freedom: In-t-iiso Fertilization and a tiroman's Right to Ciioox Examining Committee: Chair. Marjorie Cohen, Proikssor of Women's StudiesPolltical Science Senior Snpenisor Associate Professor of IYoi~isn'sStudies and Philosophy hleredith Kirnball Associate Professor of Women's Studies and Psychology Sue Penfold External Examiner Professor of Psychiatry, Lrnivs~sitpof British Columbia I r%r.CFnI l-7- AHSIKAL a For decades the fen;ii:;st stmeirkb- for reproductive freedom has centred around the principie of a wornail's fight to choose - a philosophy whch has afiinned he abiliti and right of ail women to make coriscientious moral ctwices regarding reproduction. Recent developmeilts in conceptive technolog>!, hokvever, are raising new issues for the pro-choice movement. In partictilar, there is a -mowing body of feminist researck whch highlights the negative impact that highly tzchnologicai procedm-es. such as in-vitro Fer-tilization, habe oil women's reproductive freedom. Based on this research, mall: feminists argue against ally frirther developmen: or application of IVF. III respome, ad~~ocatzsof IVF argue that it is inconsistent for pro-choice feminists to support teclunolo_py to prevent or terminate a pregnancy and oppose technolop designed to achieve one. It is this apparent contradiction which lies at the centTe of this theyis. More specifically. this work is an attempt to re-examine the 'right to chmse' approach to wo~nen'sreproductive freedoin. I argue that a political movement based on the individi!ai right to choose is ultimately insufficient to guarantee \wmenis reproductive freedom, and that feminists must now move beyond the issue of who should decide. to consider the reproductive options available to wornen and the conditions tinder ~vhiclnthey make their choices. The question is no longer whether pro-choice advocates are inconsistent if they do not srtppo1-i any a~idail rechnological developments. It is whether certain t~'tfi11010gicduptims are consistent ivitli a feminist morality of choice. Uliirnatet)., I want to affirm that the feminist struggle for reproductive freedom is not simpt.\.;a demand for the right to choose. It is also a demand for reproductive options which respect the integity of women's bodies and rhe physical and psychoiogical healrit of\vorrreri. it is ;; demand for ~t.urn::~t's increased control over their bodies, their reproduct:\ c processes anif their lives in general. Access to any and all reproducti1.e tt.chnoIctgies does riot -marantee reproductive fisedorn for \\omen, and pro-thoice feminists can consistently quesrion the particular reproductive choices women make, without abandoning a respect for their ability to choose. i would like to thank my senior supervisor, Sue Wendell, who always provided me with support, encouragement, and thoughtfuf criticism md who taught me to have confidence in tny work. Tiranks ro my frie~~dsand colleapes at the Everywolnan's Health Centre work embodies the principle of empowering women and who gave me the opportttltity tu pl!t my politics into practice. My thanks to Sman Niirse, iiiend, housemate and soul-supporter, who was always there to fend art ear, an opinion and, when 1 needed it most, a quiet space to work. Thank you to my it~isband,Paul Degelman, for always supporting my goals and dreams and for filliilg rns iik with laurrhter.d and joy. FinalIy, I wot~fdlike to thank my parents, Eunice and Gordon Dohlen, who have always taught me to believe in myself and my ideas. My vision of the fitttlre draws its stren~~lrfrom their love. TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER ONE A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE: ................................................... 7 DEVELOPMENT OF THE DEBATE: ............................................. 8 FEMllJIST COMMON GROUND: ..................... ..., ........................9 DISCRIMINATORY COSTS AND BENEFITS: ................... 9 RISKS TO WOMEN'S HEALTH AND mLL-BEING: ........ 13 INCREASED MEDICALIZATION & MALE CONTROL OVER REPRODUCTION: ................................. 19 CHAPTER TWO NEW REPRODUCTIVE TECHNOLOGIES AND CHOICE: .............c.74 RADICAL, FEMINIST ANALYSES: ............................................ 25 SOCIALIST FEhmST CRITICISMS. ........................................... 32 STRENGTHS & 'WAKNESSES OF SOCIALIST FEMINIST ANALYSES : .................................................................................... 39 CHAPTER THREE THE EXPERIENCE OF INFERTILITY: ............................................. 44 =SEARCH ON THE EXPERIENCE OF INFERTILITY:.............. 45 WERTILITY AS A SOCIAL, PROCESS: ...................................... 47 GENDER DIFFERENCES IN RESPONSE TO INFE'RTILITY: ......49 RESPONSIBILITY:............................................................... 50 PSYCHOLOGICAL AND EMOTIONAL RESPONSES: ...... 52 ADTXTP CC Curl~uu: ............................................................................... J J EXPLmTGGENDER-SPECIFIC RESPONSES TO INFERTILITY: ................................................................................ 57 REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM - MAKING THE COhfNECTIONS : ............................................................................ 64 FEMIiu'IST ETHf CS AED CONCEPTIVE TECHNOLOGIES: ......... 68 LIMITS OF A 'RIGHT TO CHOOSE' APPROACH TO REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM: ....................................................... 69 FEMINIST ETHICS & A NEW APPROACH TO REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM. .......................................................71 FUTURE POLITICAL STRATEGIES: ............................................ 79 CONCLUSION: ............................................................................... 83 FOOTNOTES .......................................................................................... 84 PNTRODUCTI OK: Biological reproduction, that most 'natural' of human activities. is presently the subject of' major technological intervention. Although scientiiic understanding of reproductive processes is still incomplete7it is now possible to apply technulo_g),at every stage - conception, implantation, gestation atxi birth. The development and expansion of these technologies raises serious legal, ethml, social, political and economic questions, and comrne~~tators from a variety of fields, iricluding medicine, science, law, psychology and politics are deliberating over their irilplications. Feminists in each c~fthese areas are also examining the meaning of these technolog:es, and what n~:rkcs their analyses unique is their specific focus on the health and well-being of women. A feminist approach is based on the recognition that it is women, and not men, who are the primary fxus of reproductive medical intervention. Because it is their bodies, rather than their partners', which are exarnincd, probed, poked and manipulated, it is usually women who bear the physical 2nd emotional pain of the new reproductive technologes. More~ver,because it is women who have the primary responsibility for childcare, it is they who will experience the negative familial and social implications of the technologes in the most profound ways. In short, "women have a huge stake in reproduction in general, and in the NRTs [new reproductive tcchologics] specifically ." (NAC, 1990, 12) A feminist approach is also based on ihc recognition that a central underlying issue in the debate over new reproductive technologies is wornerr's reproductive freedom. Infertility techologes, llke abortion md contraception, are part of a continuum of technological developments whch directly aEect how women, whether fertile or mfertile, experience their reproductive capacities. Thus, new reproductive technologies, lrke abortion and conl-raception, have importat implications for the feminist political movement for reproductive freedom. Traditionally, ths movement has been firmly based on the principle of 'a woman's right to choose', and historically, the struggle for women's rights to determine
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Kate Millet— Women, Aids & Choice
    THE JOURNAL OF SUBSTANCE FOR PROGRESSIVES VOL X1988 $2.95 •KATE MILLET— An Exclusive Interview •a Prostitute and a Ph.D. speak out on WOMEN, AIDS & CHOICE •THE TEEN WHO REFUSED TO KILL THE TEEN WHO JUST SAID "NO!" 15 • New York Pro-Choice Coalition How a 15-Year-Old Woman demonstrator puts her politics on the Turned A School front line at rally in front of St. Patrick's System Upside Down FEATURES Cathedral during "Operation Rescue"- INTERVIEW BY Photo by Bettye Lane BREAKING THE BARRIERS ROBERTA KALECHOFSKY Merle Hoffman Interviews Kate Millet DEPARTMENTS Cover Photography NO MANDATORY TESTING! 10 Bettye Lane A Feminist Prostitute Speaks Out Editorial: Merle Hoffman 1 BY CAROL LEIGH ON THE ISSUES HIV-POSITIVE WOMEN HAVE We've Come A Long Way??? 4 RIGHTS TOO— 11 Feedback 25 and They're Often Denied BY BARBARA SANTEE, Ph.D. Choice Books 18 of nightsticks, sawhorses being shoved into my face, the mounting tension of the crowds around ON THE ISSUES me and the palpable smell of danger—was something quite different from anything I had ever experienced. "Where are your troops, Hoffman?" [ON THE My questioner had verbalized one of my private intellectual dialogues. But really not so private— | THE JOURNAL OF SUBSTANCE FOR PROGRESSIVES I after all, the question of just where the feminist VOL. X, 1988 movement is now, where the feminist movement is going and is the feminist movement alive or dead, ad infinitum—has become the intellectual staple, PUBLISHER/EDITOR IN CHIEF Merle Hoffman the core issue around which media, feminists, politicians and anyone who feels like it can instantly MANAGING EDITOR pontificate.
    [Show full text]
  • Reproductive Rights
    Reproductive Rights Oxford Handbooks Online Reproductive Rights Véronique Mottier The Oxford Handbook of Gender and Politics Edited by Georgina Waylen, Karen Celis, Johanna Kantola, and S. Laurel Weldon Print Publication Date: Mar 2013 Subject: Political Science, Comparative Politics Online Publication Date: Aug 2013 DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199751457.013.0008 Abstract and Keywords This article discusses feminist scholarship on three specific areas of the politics of reproduction. It first defines the concept of reproduction as the production of offspring; reproduction is also considered as a key theme of feminist theory and political practice before and after Simone de Beauvoir. The article then studies state control over the procreative choices of the citizens, specifically the eugenic population policies introduced during the first few decades of the twentieth century. The next section focuses on feminist mobilization around abortion and contraceptive rights and outlines the ways reproductive rights have been included in the political arena due to women’s movements. The article concludes with a study of the impact of the latest reproductive technologies on modern politics of gender along with the feminist responses to the challenges posed by recent improvements in this area. Keywords: reproduction, feminist scholarship, feminist theory, Simone de Beauvoir, procreative choices, feminist mobilization, abortion, reproductive rights, reproductive technologies, feminist responses Introduction Simone de Beauvoir’s The Second Sex, first published in 1949, famously blamed women’s reproductive bodies and activities for their subordinate social status. Writing at a time when marriage and motherhood constituted the main horizon of female social respectability, de Beauvoir portrayed marriage, housework, and childcare as mutually reinforcing women’s dependence on men.
    [Show full text]
  • Life Itself’: a Socio-Historic Examination of FINRRAGE
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by White Rose E-theses Online From ‘Death of the Female’ to ‘Life Itself’: A Socio-Historic Examination of FINRRAGE Stevienna Marie de Saille Submitted in accordance with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Leeds School of Sociology and Social Policy September 2012 ii The candidate confirms that the work submitted is her own and that appropriate credit has been given where reference has been made to the work of others. This copy has been supplied on the understanding that it is copyright material and that no quotation from the thesis may be published without proper acknowledgement. © 2012, The University of Leeds and Stevienna Marie de Saille The right of Stevienna Marie de Saille to be identified as Author of this work has been asserted by her in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS There are a number of people who made this thesis possible in a number of different, fantastically important ways. My deepest thanks to: - My supervisors, Prof. Anne Kerr and Dr. Paul Bagguley, for their patience, advice, editorial comments, and the occasional kickstart when the project seemed just a little(!) overwhelming, and my examiners, Prof. Maureen McNeil and Dr. Angharad Beckett for their insight and suggestions. - The School of Sociology and Social Policy, for awarding me the teaching bursary which made this possible, and all the wonderful faculty and support staff who made it an excellent experience. - The archivists in Special Collections at the University of Leeds, and to the volunteers at the Feminist Archive North for giving me an all-access pass.
    [Show full text]
  • What Counts As Feminist Theory?
    What counts as feminist theory? [May-July 2003/2009:] This is one of the papers referred to in ‘Introduction to the refereed papers’. I wrote the paper in 1999, in response to the pre-publicity for the journal, Feminist Theory, which had asked for submissions on the question of what counts as feminist theory (among others). I sent it off in time for the inaugural issue of the journal, which appeared in 2000. It was sent to three reviewers, two of whom argued against publishing it. The third recommended publication despite some disagreements she had with it, but the majority prevailed and I received a letter telling me my paper had been rejected. I wrote a reply to the letter and to the readers’ reports, pointing out a number of problems with the reasons given for the rejection. (This reply is included below, at the end of the paper). When the first issue of the journal appeared, the editorial referred approvingly to ‘feminist theory in all its many and diverse forms’, and contained the following statement: ‘We intend this journal to be … a place where all shades of feminist opinion can be aired … we neither wish to impose any form of theoretical orthodoxy nor any single definition of what counts as feminist theory. This theoretical heterodoxy is central to our project’ (Griffin et al, 2000: 5). In the light of the rejection of my paper and the inadequacy of the reasons given, this statement rang somewhat hollow. It sounded to me like an example of what Herbert Marcuse referred to as ‘repressive tolerance’ (Marcuse, 1969), the claim to be all- inclusive and accepting that functions to reduce everything to the lowest common denominator of irrelevance.
    [Show full text]
  • Feminism and the 'Woman As Mother' Discourse in Reproductive Politics In
    Feminism and the ‘Woman Equals Mother’ Discourse in Reproductive Politics in Australia A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Discipline of Gender, Work and Social Inquiry School of Social Sciences Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences University of Adelaide April 2012 Angella Duvnjak BA(Hons) (Adelaide University) BSW (Flinders University) i ii Table of Contents Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................................... iii Abstract ............................................................................................................................................................... v Declaration ........................................................................................................................................................ vii Acknowledgments ............................................................................................................................................ viii Chapter 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background: The journey to ‘here’ 1 1.2 Time, Context and Structure of the Thesis 5 1.2.1 Situating the research questions .................................................................................................. 7 1.2.2 Research questions ..................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • From Test-Tube Women to Bodies Without Women Women's Studies
    Women's Studies International Forum 31 (2008) 157–175 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Women's Studies International Forum journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/wsif From test-tube women to bodies without women Renate Klein Feminist International Network of Resistance to Reproductive and Genetic Engineering (FINRRAGE), PO Box 212, North Melbourne Victoria 3051, Australia article info synopsis Available online 5 June 2008 In this article I summarise twenty-five years of international feminist resistance to reproductive and genetic engineering. Drawing on the work of FINRRAGE (Feminist International Network of Resistance to Reproductive and Genetic Engineering) I list the main objections of feminist critics to the global commodification of women. Under the guise of ‘doing good’ and the catch cry ‘women want it’ (i.e. allegedly to alleviate the suffering of infertility/too much fertility, or eliminate genetic imperfection), reproductive and genetic engineers have reduced women — and their babies — to a series of body parts and tissues that can be traded, screened and eliminated at will. Discussions include the many physiological as well as psychological dangers inherent in the medicalisation of in/fertile women's lives and their children through the Big Business of in vitro fertilisation (IVF) and related genetic technologies in a global context. I also critically examine the pro-technology position of liberal feminists including their much touted concept of ‘choice’. Lastly, I ask where the recent opening of the door to embryonic stem cell research via commercial and ‘altruistic’ egg cell ‘donation’ is taking society and how long it will be before cloning of human beings is justified as ‘for our own good’ and women's alienation to their own body (parts) will lead to their annihilation.
    [Show full text]
  • Derridean Deconstruction and Feminism
    DERRIDEAN DECONSTRUCTION AND FEMINISM: Exploring Aporias in Feminist Theory and Practice Pam Papadelos Thesis Submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Discipline of Gender, Work and Social Inquiry Adelaide University December 2006 Contents ABSTRACT..............................................................................................................III DECLARATION .....................................................................................................IV ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................V INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 1 THESIS STRUCTURE AND OVERVIEW......................................................................... 5 CHAPTER 1: LAYING THE FOUNDATIONS – FEMINISM AND DECONSTRUCTION ............................................................................................... 8 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 8 FEMINIST CRITIQUES OF PHILOSOPHY..................................................................... 10 Is Philosophy Inherently Masculine? ................................................................ 11 The Discipline of Philosophy Does Not Acknowledge Feminist Theories......... 13 The Concept of a Feminist Philosopher is Contradictory Given the Basic Premises of Philosophy.....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Defending Intimacy Against What? Limits of Antisurrogacy Feminisms
    The University of Manchester Research Defending Intimacy against What? Limits of Antisurrogacy Feminisms DOI: 10.1086/692518 Document Version Final published version Link to publication record in Manchester Research Explorer Citation for published version (APA): Lewis, S. (2017). Defending Intimacy against What? Limits of Antisurrogacy Feminisms. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture & Society, 43(1), 97-125. [1]. https://doi.org/10.1086/692518 Published in: Signs: Journal of Women in Culture & Society Citing this paper Please note that where the full-text provided on Manchester Research Explorer is the Author Accepted Manuscript or Proof version this may differ from the final Published version. If citing, it is advised that you check and use the publisher's definitive version. General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the Research Explorer are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. Takedown policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please refer to the University of Manchester’s Takedown Procedures [http://man.ac.uk/04Y6Bo] or contact [email protected] providing relevant details, so we can investigate your claim. Download date:27. Sep. 2021 Sophie Lewis Defending Intimacy against What? Limits of Antisurrogacy Feminisms t is now a simple fact that surrogacy is a booming, global business,” reads a memorandum posted under the heading “The Parentage/Surrogacy I 1 Project” at the Hague Conference on Private International Law. But the ambivalent term “parentage/surrogacy” implies a philosophical open- mindedness about the difference between the two terms that is reflected al- most nowhere else in public discourse.
    [Show full text]
  • Perspectives on Reproduction
    Stockholm University Linnaeus Center on Social Policy and Family Dynamics in Europe, SPaDE Feminist Perspectives on Motherhood and Reproduction Gerda Neyer and Laura Bernardi Working Paper 2011: 4 Feminist Perspectives on Motherhood and Reproduction* Gerda Neyer Stockholm University Demography Unit 106 91 Stockholm [email protected] Laura Bernardi University of Lausanne, Institute for Social Sciences Abstract: Motherhood and reproduction have been at the core of the feminist discourse about women's rights ever since its onset. For the first and second feminist movements, the right to abortion and the public recognition of motherhood have been main issues in the discourse on reproduction. Since the last two decades of the 20th century, the potentials of assisted reproductive technologies (ART) have opened up new venues of feminist discourse. In this paper we sketch the main feminist lines of argumentation regarding motherhood and reproduction since the 1970s, and we identify specific shifts in their recurrent issues. We argue that an essential contribution of feminism to the understanding of motherhood as a structuring category has been its insistence on the distinction between biological and social motherhood. Feminist discourse shows how ART has further decomposed biological motherhood and has altered the meaning of motherhood and reproduction. Feminist analysis maintains that despite the rhetoric of choice surrounding ART, these technologies have not increased women‟s reproductive freedom. The decomposition of biological motherhood, the medical, legal, and commercial development of reproduction, and the change in the social perception of motherhood have rather established new forms of control over female reproduction. * This paper is also available as a Stockholm Research Report in Demography 2 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Choice, Control and Issues of Informed Consent: the New Reproductive and Pre-Birth Technologies, Robyn Rowland
    CHOICE, CONTROL AND ISSUES OF INFORMED CONSENT: THE NEW REPRODUCTIVE AND PRE-BIRTH TECHNOLOGIES1 Dr. Robyn Rowland Social Psychologist Senior Lecturer in Women’s Studies School of Humanities Deakin University Victoria, 3217, Australia. Paper delivered to the Annual Conference of the American Society of Law and Medicine, Sydney, August 1986; and to the Law Reform Commission of Victoria Symposia 1986: Informed Consent. 2 In Australia, particularly in Victoria, there has been heated public debate about the social implications of the new reproductive technologies. One of the initial arguments put forward by the medical researchers for introducing this technology was that ‘women want it’. This catchcry has been slightly rephrased recently by both the medical researchers and the users of this technology. The emerging argument is that a woman should have ‘the right to choose’ to use the technologies. Feminists have argued that women have been used as experimental subjects and living laboratories on reproductive technology programs. The very evidence of women’s experimental status which has been produced by feminists, is now being used to argue an informed consent theme by users of the technology and civil libertarians. Inherent in this line of debate is the assumption that if women are fully informed, there are no problems with the technology and all is well. I will analyse both these claims: a woman’s right to choose, and the demands for informed consent. I argue that at the base of both is an individualism which conflicts with the social implications of the technologies which themselves impact on all members of society, but particularly on women as a social group.
    [Show full text]
  • Fighting Science with Social Science: Activist Scholarship in an International Resistance Project
    This is a repository copy of Fighting Science with Social Science: Activist Scholarship in an International Resistance Project. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/91388/ Version: Accepted Version Article: de Saille, S. (2014) Fighting Science with Social Science: Activist Scholarship in an International Resistance Project. Sociological Research Online, 19 (3). 18. ISSN 1360-7804 https://doi.org/10.5153/sro.3331 Reuse Unless indicated otherwise, fulltext items are protected by copyright with all rights reserved. The copyright exception in section 29 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 allows the making of a single copy solely for the purpose of non-commercial research or private study within the limits of fair dealing. The publisher or other rights-holder may allow further reproduction and re-use of this version - refer to the White Rose Research Online record for this item. Where records identify the publisher as the copyright holder, users can verify any specific terms of use on the publisher’s website. Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ 2012:176:1 'Fighting Science with Social Science: Activist Scholarship in an International Resistance Project' Stevienna de Saille, University of Sheffield Abstract: This paper draws on a socio-historic case study of the Feminist International Network of Resistance to Reproductive and Genetic Engineering (FINRRAGE) in order to consider the ways in which activists create and develop knowledge in movements around complex emergent technologies.
    [Show full text]
  • INFORMATION to USERS the Most Advanced Technology Has Been Used to Photo­ Graph and Reproduce This Manuscript from the Microfilm Master
    INFORMATION TO USERS The most advanced technology has been used to photo­ graph and reproduce this manuscript from the microfilm master. UMI films the original text directly from the copy submitted. Thus, some dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from a computer printer. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyrighted material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are re­ produced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each oversize page is available as one exposure on a standard 35 mm slide or as a 17" x 23" black and white photographic print for an additional charge. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. 35 mm slides or 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. Accessing the World's Information since 1938 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor. Ml 48106-1346 USA Order Number 881229S The case for identity creation: Reproductive technology and the rhetoric of social intervention Pondozzi, Jeannine C., Ph.D. The Ohio State University, 1988 Copyright ©1988 by Pondozzi, Jeannine C. All rights reserved. UMI 300 N. Zeeb Rd. Ann Arbor, MI 48106 PLEASE NOTE: In all cases this material has been filmed in the best possible way from the available copy.
    [Show full text]