Suitable substances: how biobanks (re)store biologicals

References

• Allen, Judy, and Beverly Mcnamara. 2011. “Reconsidering the Value of Consent in Bio Bank Research.” Bioethics 25 (3): 155–166. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8519.2009.01749.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Almeling, Rene. 2011. Sex Cells: The Medical Market for Eggs and Sperm. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Alter, Joseph. 1992. The Wrestler’s Body: Identity and Ideology in North India. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bennett, Lynn. 1983. Dangerous Wives and Sacred Sisters: Social and Symbolic Roles of High-caste Women in Nepal. New York: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bergmann, Sven. 2014. Ausweichrouten der Reproduktion. Biomedizinische Mobilität und die Praxis der Eizellspende. Berlin: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Bharadwaj, Aditya. 2003. “Why Adoption is Not an Option in India: The Visibility of Infertility, the Secrecy of Donor Insemination, and Other Cultural Complexities.” Social Science and Medicine 56 (9): 1867–1880. doi:10.1016/S0277-9536(02)00210-1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Böck, Monika, and Aparna Rao, eds. 2000. “Indigenous Models and Kinship Theories: An Introduction to a South Asian Perspective.” In Culture, Creation and Procreation: Concepts of Kinship in South Asian Practice, 1–49. New York: Berghahn Books.
   Google Scholar
• Burghardt, Scout, and Kerstin Tote. 2010. “Zwischen Risikovermeidung, Normalisierung und Markt: Spenderauswahl und matching in Samenbanken.” In Samenbanken – Samenspender: Ethnographische und Historische Perspektiven auf Männlichkeiten in der Reproduktionsmedizin, edited by M. Knecht, A. F. Heinitz, S. Burghardt, and S. Mohr, 142–162. Münster: LIT Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Busby, Helen. 2006. “Biobanks, Bioethics and Concepts of Donated Blood in the UK.” Sociology of Health & Illness 28 (6): 850–865. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9566.2006.00546.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carsten, Janet. 2004. After Kinship. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cooper, Melinda. 2008. Life as Surplus: Biotechnology and Capitalism in the Neoliberal Era. Seattle: University of Washington Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cooper, Melinda, and Catherine Waldby. 2014. Clinical Labor: Tissue Donors and Research Subjects in the Global Bioeconomy. Durham: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Deomampo, Daisy. 2016. Transnational Reproduction: Race, Kinship, and Commercial Surrogacy in India. New York: New York University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dube, Leela. 1986. “Seed and Earth: The Symbolism of Biological Reproduction and Sexual Relations of Production.” In Visibiliy and Power: Essays on Women in Society and Development, edited by Leela Dube, Eleanor Lealock, and Shirley Ardener, 22–41. Delhi: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dube, Leela. 1988. “On the Construction of Gender. Hindu Girls in Patrilineal India.” Economic and Political Weekly 23 (18): WS11–WS19.
   Google Scholar
• Edwards, Jeannette. 2014. “Undoing Kinship.” In Relatedness in Assisted Reproduction. Families, Origins and Identities, edited by Tabitha Freeman, Susanna Graham, Fatemeh Ebtehaj, and Martin Richards, 44–60. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Edwards, Jeanette, and Marilyn Strathern. 2000. “Including Our Own.” In Cultures of Relatedness: New Approaches to the Study of Kinship, edited by Janet Carsten, 149–166. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Émon, Ayeshah. 2017. “A Donor by No Name is Just Another Number? The Management of Anonymity in US Cryobanks.” BioSocieties 12: 1–22. doi:10.1057/s41292-016-0001-8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fassin, Didier. 2009. “Another Politics of Life is Possible.” Theory, Culture and Society 26 (5): 44–60. doi:10.1177/0263276409106349.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franklin, Sarah. 2001. “Biologization Revisited: Kinship Theory in the Context of the New Biologies.” In Relative Values: Reconfiguring Kinship Studies, edited by Sarah Franklin and Susan McKinnon, 302–325. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Franklin, Sarah. 2004. “Life.” In Encyclopedia of Bioethics, edited by Stephen Post, 3rd ed., 1381–1387. New York: Macmillan Reference USA.
   Google Scholar
• Gottweiss, Herbert, and Kurt Zatloukal. 2007. “Biobank Governance: Trends and Perspectives.” Pathobiology 74 (4): 206–211. doi:10.1159/000104446.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Government of India. 2005. “National Guidelines for Accreditation, Supervision & Regulation of ART Clinics in India.” New Delhi. http://icmr.nic.in/art/art_clinics.htm.
   Google Scholar
• Government of India. 2010. “The Assisted Reproductive Technologies (Regulation) Bill – 2010.” New Delhi. http://icmr.nic.in/guide/ART%20REGULATION%20Draft%20Bill1.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Gupta, Jyotsna. 2011. “Exploring Appropriation of “Surplus” Ova and Embryos in Indian IVF Clinics.” New Genetics and Society 30 (2): 167–180. doi:10.1080/14636778.2011.574373.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Helmreich, Stefan. 2008. “Species of Biocapital.” Science as Culture 17 (4): 463–478. doi:10.1080/09505430802519256.
   Google Scholar
• Hoeyer, Klaus. 2002. “Conflicting Notions of Personhood in Genetic Research.” Anthropology Today 18 (5): 9–13. doi:10.1111/1467-8322.00129.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hoeyer, Klaus. 2004. “Biobanks and Informed Consent: An Anthropological Contribution to Medical Ethics.” Umeå University Medical Dissertations, New Series No 929.
   Google Scholar
• Hoeyer, Klaus. 2012. “Size Matters: The Ethical, Legal and Social Issues Surrounding Large-scale Genetic Biobank Initiatives.” Norsk Epidemiologi 21 (2): 211–220. doi: 10.5324/nje.v21i2.1496
   Google Scholar
• Hoeyer, Klaus. 2017. “Suspense: Reflections on the Cryopolitics of the Body.” In Cryopolitics: Frozen Life in a Melting World, edited by Joanna Radin and Emma Kowal, 207–214. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hoeyer, Klaus, and Niels Lynöe. 2006. “Motivating Donors to Genetic Research? Anthropological Reasons to Rethink the Role of Informed Consent.” Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 9 (1): 13–23. doi:10.1007/s11019-005-5067-1.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Howell, Signe. 2003. “Kinning: The Creation of Life. Trajectories in Transnational Adoptive Families.” Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 9 (3): 465–484. doi:10.1111/1467-9655.00159.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howell, Signe. 2006. The Kinning of Foreigners: Transnational Adoption in a Global Perspective. New York: Berghahn Books.
   Google Scholar
• Högbacka, Riitta. 2016. Global Families, Inequality and Transnational Adoption. The De-Kinning of First Mothers. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Klotz, Maren. 2014. (K)information: Gamete Donation and Kinship Knowledge in Germany and Britain. Frankfurt and New York: Campus Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Knecht, Michi. 2010. “Reflexive Bioökonomisierung: Werteproduktion in Einer Samenbank.” In Samenbanken – Samenspender: Ethnographische und Historische Perspektiven auf Männlichkeiten in der Reproduktionsmedizin, edited by M. Knecht, A. F. Heinitz, S. Burghardt, and S. Mohr, 163–176. Münster: LIT Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Konrad, Monica. 2005. Nameless Relations: Anonymity, Melanesia and Reproductive Gift Exchange Between British Ova Donors and Recipients. New York: Berghahn Books.
   Google Scholar
• Landecker, Hannah. 2000. “Immortality, In Vitro. A History of the HeLa Cell Line.” In Biotechnology and Culture: Bodies, Anxieties, Ethics, edited by Paul P. Brodwin, 53–72. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mamo, Laura. 2005. “Biomedicalizing Kinship: Sperm Banks and the Creation of Affinity-ties.” Science as Culture 14 (3): 237–264. doi:10.1080/09505430500216833.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Marriott, McKim. 1990. “Constructing an Indian Ethnosociology.” In India Through Hindu Categories, 3–40. New Delhi: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Marsland, Rebecca, and Ruth Prince. 2012. “What is Life Worth? Exploring Biomedical Interventions, Survival, and the Politics of Life.” Medical Anthropology Quarterly 26 (4): 453–469. doi:10.1111/maq.12001.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, Emily. 1991. “The Egg and the Sperm: How Science Has Constructed a Romance Based on Stereotypical Male-Female Roles.” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 16 (3): 485–501. doi: 10.1086/494680
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Merleau-Ponty, Noémie. 2017. “Féconder in vitro dans des laboratoires en Inde et en France. Une somatotechnique?” Ethnologie Française 3 (7): 511–520. doi:10.3917/ethn.173.0509.
   Google Scholar
• Mohr, Sebastion. 2014. “Beyond Motivation: On What it Means to be a Sperm Donor in Denmark.” Anthropology & Medicine 21 (2): 162–173. doi:10.1080/13648470.2014.914806.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mohr, Sebastian. 2018. Being a Sperm Donor: Masculinity, Sexuality, and Biosociality in Denmark. New York: Berghahn.
   Google Scholar
• Moore, Lisa Jean, and Matthew Allen Schmidt. 1999. “On the Construction of Male Differences. Marketing Varations in Technosemen.” Men and Masculinities 1 (4): 331–351. doi:10.1177/1097184X99001004001.
   Google Scholar
• Pande, Amrita. 2009. ““It May Be Her Eggs But It’s My Blood”: Surrogates and Everyday Forms of Kinship in India.” Qualitative Sociology 32 (4): 379–397. doi:10.1007/s11133-009-9138-0.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Papaioannou, Theo. 2012. “Democraric Governance of Genomics: The Case of UK Biobank.” New Genetics and Society Critical Studies of Contemporary Biosciences 31 (2): 111–133. doi:10.1080/14636778.2011.600435.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parry, Jonathan. 1994. Death in Banaras. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Patel, Tulsi, ed. 2007. “Introduction: Gender Relations, NRTs and Female Foeticide in India.” In Sex-selective Abortion in India. Gender Society and New Reproductive Technologies, 27–60. London: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Patra, Prasanna Kumar, and Margaret Sleeboom-Faulkner. 2009. “Informed Consent in Genetic Research and Biobanking in India: Some Common Impediments.” Genomics, Society and Policy 5 (1): 100–113. doi:10.1186/1746-5354-5-1-100.
   Google Scholar
• Paxon, Heather. 2012. The Life of Cheese: Crafting Food and Value in America. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Porqueres i Gené, Enric, and Jérôme Wilgaux. 2009. “Incest, Embodiment, Genes and Kinship.” In European Kinship in the Age of Biotechnology, edited by Jeanette Edwards and Carles Salazar, 112–127. New York: Berghahn Books.
   Google Scholar
• Radin, Joanna. 2017. Life on Ice: A History of New Uses for Cold Blood. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Roberts, Elizabeth. 2007. “Extra Embryos: The Ethics of Cryopreservation in Ecuador and Elsewhere.” American Ethnologist 34 (1): 181–199. doi:10.1525/ae.2007.34.1.181.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sahlins, Marshall. 2013. What Kinship is – and is Not. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Simpson, Bob. 2004. “Impossible Gifts: Bodies, Buddhism and Bioethics in Contemporary Sri Lanka.” Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 10 (4): 839–859. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9655.2004.00214.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smietana, Marcin. 2017. “Affective De-Commodifying, Economic De-Kinning: Surrogates’ and Gay Fathers’ Narratives in U.S. Surrogacy.” Sociological Research Online 22 (2): 1–13. doi:10.5153/sro.4312.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strathern, Marilyn. 1999. Property, Substance, and Effect: Anthropological Essays on Persons and Things. London: Athlone Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sunder Rajan, Kaushik. 2006. Biocapital: The Constitution of Postgenomic Life. Durham: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Swanson, Kara. 2014. Banking on the Body. The Market in Blood, Milk, and Sperm in Modern America. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Turner, Victor. 1964. “Betwixt and Between: The Liminal Period in Rites de Passage.” In Proceedings of the 1964 Annual Spring Meeting of the American Ethnological Society, edited by J. Helm, 4–20. Seattle: American Ethnological Society.
   Google Scholar
• Vora, Kalindi. 2013. “Potential Potential, Risk, and Return in Transnational Indian Gestational Surrogacy.” Current Anthropology 54 (S7): S97–S106. doi:10.1086/671018.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wahlberg, Ayo. 2008. “Reproductive Medicine and the Concept of ‘Quality’.” Clinical Ethics 3 (4): 189–193. doi:10.1258/ce.2008.008033.
   Google Scholar
• Wahlberg, Ayo. 2018. Good Quality: The Routinization of Sperm Banking in China. Oakland: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Waldby, Catherine. 2002. “Stem Cells, Tisse Cultures and the Production of Biovalue.” Health: An Interdisciplinary Journal for the Social Study of Health, Illness and Medicine 6 (3): 305–323. doi:10.1177/136345930200600304.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waldby, Catherine, and Robert Mitchell. 2006. Tissue Economies: Blood, Organs, and Cell Lines in Late Capitalism. Durham: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zelizer, Viviana. 2005. The Purchase of Intimacy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zelizer, Vivianne. 2011. “How I Became a Relational Economic Sociologist and What Does That Mean?” Working Paper 5, Princeton University.
   Google Scholar