English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

In this issue, Spanish IVF-clinicians (Marina et al., 2010) report the rstexperiences of their institution with a novel procedure allowing lesbiancouples to share biological motherhood. Technically, this involves oneof the partners providing the oocytes for in vitro fertilization (IVF) usingdonor sperm, whereas the other partner provides the uterus andbears the child. The authors refer to this as ROPA (reception ofoocytes from partner). For the couples involved, this procedure,although more challenging and costly than having a child throughdonor insemination (DI), would have the psychosocial advantage ofallowing them to both participate in the creation of the child. WithDI, the procedure that most centres would offer as the treatmentof choice for reproductively healthy lesbian couples, they can have achild of which inevitably one partner is ‘only’ a social mother. WithROPA, however, they can have a child of which both partners arebiological mothers, although in different ways.The idea that IVF might make it possible for lesbian couples to sharebiological motherhood is far from new, but has until now mainly beendiscussed as an interesting hypothetical concept (Chan et al., 1993;Robertson, 1994; Dondorp, 2004; Woodward and Norton, 2006).Although there have been incidental media stories about lesbiancouples seeking this type of reproductive treatment (De Telegraaf,2000; BBC News, 2005) and although it was known that somecouples had succeeded in thus creating ‘egg mommy, wombmommy families’ (Ehrensaft, 2008), the practice has not receivedmuch attention. Recently, a sociological study of partner dynamicsbetween lesbian co-mothers included 10 couples who used IVF as ameans to share biological motherhood (Pelka, 2009). This issue’sarticle by Marina et al. is, to our knowledge, the rst clinical reportof this procedure in a medical scientic journal. There is no doubtthat this will give new impetus to the debate about how this appli-cation of IVF technology may challenge established views about par-enting, the family and the aims of assisted reproductive treatment(ART). As the authors stress, it is this wider dimension that makestheir publication remarkable, rather than the technical aspects,which are not different from regular procedures of IVF using donoroocytes.In their article, Marina et al. refer to general principles of medicalethics: benecence, non-malecence and respect for patient auton-omy (Beauchamp and Childress, 2009). They conclude that the prac-tice of offering ROPA meets all the requirements of these principles.First, as ROPA leads to the fullment of an important desire of thecouple, it would be an instance of ‘doing good’. Second, given thepositive outcome of studies of the development of children in ‘lesbian-rst families’, no one would be harmed. Finally, as the procedure iscarried out on the request of a well-informed couple, it would be inaccord with the principle of autonomy. However, this analysis leavesroom for further considerations of medical ethics that we brieyaddress as a contribution to further debate.

Shared lesbian motherhood: a challenge of established concepts and frameworks