The psychology of assisted reproduction — or psychology assisting its reproduction?

References

• Australian Psychological Society, 1994. Membership matters (1994).
   Google Scholar
• Baran, A., and Pannor, R., 1989. Lethal secrets. New York: Warner; 1989.
   Google Scholar
• Bernard, C. R., Ward, C., and Knoppers, B. M., 1992. “Best interests of the child” exposed: A portrait of Quebec custody and protection law, Canadian Journal of Family Law 11 (1992), pp. 57–149.
   Google Scholar
• Bolton, V., Golombok, S., Cook, R., and Rust, J., 1991. A comparative study of attitudes towards donor insemination and egg donation in recipients, potential donors, and the public, Journal of Psychosomatic and Obstetric Gynaecology 12 (1991), pp. 217–228.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowman, M. C., and Saunders, D. M., 1994. Community attitudes to maternal age and pregnancy after assisted reproductive technology: Too old at 50 years, Human Reproduction 9 (1994), pp. 167–171.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Broderick, P., and Walker, I., Donor gametes and embryos: Who wants to know and why. Presented at Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Australian Psychological Society. Perth, September 26–30, 1995a.
   Google Scholar
• Broderick, P., and Walker, I., Donors, donations, and dilemmas. Presented at Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Fertility Society of Australia. Melbourne, 1995b.
   Google Scholar
• Broderick, P., and Walker, I., 1995c. Information access and donated gametes: How much do we know about who wants to know what, Human Reproduction 10 (1995c), pp. 3338–3341.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Broderick, P., and Walker, I., Blood donors, gamete donors, and non-donors: Motivation to donate and attachment to donation. Presented at Paper presented at the XXVI International Congress of Psychology. Montreal, Canada, August, 1996a.
   Google Scholar
• Broderick, P., and Walker, I., Gamete and embryo donation and adoption: A comparison. Presented at Paper presented at the 9th Australasian Human Development Conference. Perth, April, 1996b.
   Google Scholar
• Clarkson, A., 1996. Who should be granted access to assisted reproductive technologies? An inquiry into attitudes and pronatalistic beliefs. Murdoch University; 1996, Unpublished Bachelor of Psychology thesis.
   Google Scholar
• Daniels, K. R., 1987. Semen donors in New Zealand: Their characteristics and attitudes, Child Reproduction and Fertility 5 (1987), pp. 177–190.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Daniels, K. R., 1988. Attitudes to donor insemination and IVF: A community perspective, New Zealand Social Work Review 1 (1988), pp. 4–10.
   Google Scholar
• Daniels, K. R., 1989. Semen donors: Their motivations and attitudes to their offspring, Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology 7 (1989), pp. 121–127.
   Google Scholar
• Daniels, K. R., 1993. Infertility counselling: The need for a psychosocial perspective, British Journal of Social Work 23 (1993), pp. 501–515.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daniels, K. R., 1994. Adoption and donor insemination: Factors influencing couples' choices, Child Welfare League of America 73 (1994), pp. 5–14.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daniels, K. R., and Lewis, G. M., 1996. Donor insemination: The gifting and selling of semen, Social Sciences and Medicine 42 (1996), pp. 1521–1536.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daniels, K. R., and Stjerna, I., 1993. Infertility: The social work contribution, Socionomen 6 (1993), pp. 41–46.
   Google Scholar
• Daniels, K. R., and Taylor, K., 1993. Secrecy and openness in donor insemination, Politics and the Life Sciences 12 (1993), pp. 155–170.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Davey, S., and Broderick, P., Attitudes of tertiary educated Australians to access to reproductive technology. Presented at Paper presented at the 30th Annual Conference of the Australian Psychological Society. Perth, September 26–30, 1995.
   Google Scholar
• Dawes, R., 1994. House of cards: Psychology and psychotherapy built on myth. New York: Free Press; 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Dineen, T., 1996. Manufacturing victims: What the psychology industry is doing to people. Montreal: Robert Davies; 1996.
   Google Scholar
• Edelmann, R., and Connolly, K. J., 1989. The impact of infertility and infertility investigations: Four case illustrations, Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology 7 (1989), pp. 113–119.
   Google Scholar
• Greenfeld, D., Mazure, C., Haseltine, F., and De Cherney, A., 1984. The role of the social worker in the in-vitro fertilization program, Social Work in Health Care 10 (1984), pp. 71–79.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haimes, E., 1993. Secrecy and openness in donor insemination: A sociological comment on Daniels and Taylor, Politics and the Life Sciences 12 (1993), pp. 178–180.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Handelsman, D. J., Dunn, S. M., Conway, A. J., and Jansen, R. P.S., 1985. Psychological and attitudinal profiles in donors for artificial insemination, Fertility and Sterility 43 (1985), pp. 95–101.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hill, J. L., 1991. What does it mean to be a “parent”? The claims of biology as the basis for parental rights, New York University Law Review 66 (1991), pp. 353–420.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holbrook, S., 1990. Adoption, infertility, and the new reproductive technologies: Problems and prospects for social work and welfare policy, Social Work 35 (1990), pp. 333–337.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holmes, H. B., 1993. Openness, fatherhood, and responsibility: A feminist analysis, Politics and the Life Sciences 12 (1993), pp. 180–182.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Human Reproductive Technology Act, 1993. State Government of Western Australia (1993).
   Google Scholar
• Humphrey, M., and Humphrey, H., 1986. A fresh look at genealogical bewilderment, British Journal of Medical Psychology 59 (1986), pp. 133–140.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Humphrey, M., and Humphrey, H., 1987. Marital relationships in couples seeking donor insemination, Journal of Biosocial Science 19 (1987), pp. 209–219.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Humphrey, M., Humphrey, H., and Ainsworth-Smith, I., 1991. Screening couples for parenthood by donor insemination, Social Sciences and Medicine 32 (1991), pp. 273–278.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Interim Reproductive Technology Council, 1988. Reproductive technology working party's report. Perth, WA: Ministry of Health; 1988.
   Google Scholar
• Jequier, A., 1985. Non-therapy related pregnancies in consorts of a group of men with obstructive azoospermia, Andrologia 17 (1985), pp. 6–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karpel, M. A., 1980. Family secrets: I. Conceptual and ethical issues in the relational context; U. Ethical and practical considerations in therapeutic management, Family Process 19 (1980), pp. 295–306.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keeping, D., The control of reproductive technology: Plenary address. Presented at 13th Annual Meeting of the Fertility Society of Australia. Brisbane, 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Kelly, A. E., and McKillop, K. J., 1996. Consequences of revealing personal secrets, Psychological Bulletin 120 (1996), pp. 450–465.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klock, S. C., 1993. Psychological aspects of donor insemination, Psychological Issues in Infertility 4 (1993), pp. 455–469.
   Google Scholar
• Klock, S. C., Jacob, M. C., and Maier, D., 1994. A prospective study of donor insemination patients: Secrecy, privacy, and disclosure, Fertility and Sterility 62 (1994), pp. 477–484.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klock, S. C., and Maier, D., 1991. Psychological factors related to donor insemination, Fertility and Sterility 56 (1991), pp. 489–495.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knoppers, B. M., 1993. Donor insemination: Children as In Concreto or In Abstracto subjects of rights, Politics and the Life Sciences 12 (1993), pp. 182–184.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lansac, J., 1993. One father only: Donor insemination and CECOS in France, Politics and the Life Sciences 12 (1993), pp. 185–186.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lauritzen, P., 1993. DI's dirty little secret, Politics and the Life Sciences 12 (1993), pp. 188–189.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ley, P., 1992. "Reproductive technology: What can we learn from the adoption experience". In: Swain, P., and Swain, S., eds. To search for self. Sydney: Federation; 1992. pp. 100–110.
   Google Scholar
• Liljestrand, P., 1990. Rhetoric and reason: Donor insemination politics in Sweden. University of California at San Francisco; 1990, Unpublished doctoral dissertation.
   Google Scholar
• Lumley, J., 1986. The proposed Victorian gamete register, Clinical Reproduction and Fertility 4 (1986), pp. 39–43.
   Google Scholar
• Mahlstedt, P. P., 1991. Commentary articles: Special issue on psychology and infertility, Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology 9 (1991), pp. 48–59.
   Google Scholar
• Mahlstedt, P. P., and Greenfeld, D. A., 1989. Assisted reproductive technology with donor gametes: The need for patient preparation, Fertility and Sterility 52 (1989), pp. 880–914.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mayne, R., 1994. The foetal blow, The Bulletin (1994), pp. 32–33.
   Google Scholar
• McDaniel, S. H., 1994. Within-family reproductive technologies as a solution to childlessness due to infertility: Psychological issues and interventions, Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings 1 (1994), pp. 301–309.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Melton, G. B., 1996. The child's right to a family environment: Why children's rights and family values are incompatible, American Psychologist 51 (1996), pp. 1234–1238.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mills, C. W., 1959. The sociological imagination. New York: Oxford University Press; 1959.
   Google Scholar
• Moscovici, S., 1972. "Society and theory in social psychology". In: Israel, J., and Tajfel, H., eds. The context of social psychology: A critical assessment. London: Academic Press; 1972. pp. 17–68.
   Google Scholar
• National Bioethics Consultative Committee, 1988. Access to information: An analogy between adoption and the use of gamete donation. Canberra: Author; 1988.
   Google Scholar
• National Bioethics Consultative Committee, 1989. Reproductive technology. Canberra: Author; 1989.
   Google Scholar
• Paulson, R. J., and Sauer, M. V., 1991. Counselling the infertile couple: When enough is enough, Obstetrics and Gynaecology 78 (1991), pp. 462–464.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rose, N., 1989. Governing the soul: The shaping of the private self. London: Routledge; 1989.
   Google Scholar
• Sants, H. J., 1964. Genealogical bewilderment in children with substitute parents, British Journal of Medical Psychology 37 (1964), pp. 133–141.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shenfield, F., and Steele, S. J., 1997. What are the effects of anonymity and secrecy on the welfare of the child in gamete donation, Human Reproduction 12 (1997), pp. 392–395.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Snowden, C., 1994. What makes a mother? Interviews with women involved in egg donation and surrogacy, Birth 21 (1994), pp. 77–84.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Snowden, R., and Mitchell, G. D., 1981. The artificial family: A consideration of artificial insemination by donor. London: Allen & Unwin; 1981.
   Google Scholar
• Sorosky, A. D., Baran, A., and Pannor, R., 1975. Identity conflicts in adoptees, American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 45 (1975), pp. 18–27.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sverne, T., 1983. Children conceived by artificial insemination. Stockholm: Government of Sweden; 1983.
   Google Scholar
• Triseliotis, J., 1973. In search of origins: The experiences of adopted people. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul; 1973.
   Google Scholar
• Triseliotis, J., 1993. Donor insemination and the child, Politics and the Life Sciences 12 (1993), pp. 195–197.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Turner, C., 1993. A call for openness in donor insemination, Politics and the Life Sciences 12 (1993), pp. 197–199.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tyler, J. P. P., Nicholas, M. K., Crockett, N. G., and Driscoll, G., 1983. Some attitudes to artificial insemination by donor, Clinical Reproduction and Fertility 2 (1983), pp. 151–160.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Walker, A., Gregson, S., and McLaughlin, E., 1987. Attitudes towards donor insemination: A post Warnock survey, Human Reproduction 2 (1987), pp. 745–750.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker, I., Broderick, P., and Bowen, P., 1998. Genealogical bewilderment: The career of a concept, Manuscript in preparation (1998).
   Google Scholar
• Warnock, M. A., 1984. Report of the Committee of Inquiry into Human Fertilisation and Embryology. London: Department of Health and Social Security; 1984.
   Google Scholar
• Weaver, S. M., Clifford, E., Gordon, A. G., Hay, D. M., and Robinson, J., 1993. A follow-up study of successful IVF/GIFT couples: Social-emotional well-being and adjustment to parenthood, Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics and Gynaecology 74 (1993), pp. 5–16, Suppl. 5.
   Google Scholar
• Western, J. C., 1994. Licensing parents: Can we prevent child abuse and neglect. New York: Plenum; 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Western Australian Human Reproductive Technology Council, 1995. Questions and answers about the donation of human reproductive material. Perth, WA: Health Department of Western Australia; 1995.
   Google Scholar
• Winkler, R. C., and Midford, S. M., 1986. Biological identity in adoption, artificial insemination by donor (AID) and the new birth technologies, Australian Journal of Early Childhood 11 (1986), pp. 43–48.
   Google Scholar