A Good Surrogate: The Experiences of Women Who Are Gestational Surrogates in Canada/Une Bonne Mère Porteuse : Les Expériences De Femmes Agissant Comme Mères De Substitution Au Canada
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Given current increase in gestational practices worldwide, little is known personal experiences and psychological health of women who are gestational surrogates. As such, women who have carried genetically unrelated embryo to term way of in vitro fertilization (IVF) for intended parents are focus of this article. This study delves into stories of gestational surrogates in Canada and some of challenges experienced. These women are assigned variety of names related to their role, including but not limited to gestational carrier, surrogate mother, host mother (Goldfarb et al., 2000), and birth (Ehrenshaft, 2007). In this article, term gestational surrogate will be used to identify women who undergo reproductive technologies to help friends, family, and, in some cases, strangers who wish to parent genetically related (Twine, 2011).HISTORICAL AND CONTEMPORARY CONTEXTIn 1987, first baby was born gestational in United States through IVF embryo transfer (Hanafin, 2006). Ciccarelli and Beckman (2005) report, 1991 through 1999 there were 1,600 babies ... who were born as result of IVF in America (p. 23). In 21st century, Brakman and Scholz (2006, p. 59) report that about 1,000 births result from [gestational] surrogacy in United States each year. Gestational in its simplistic description is means of reproduction.Family matters, illness, infertility challenges, and aging populations in Western societies precede decision to choose gestational and account for its rise as family-building option (Hanafin, 2006). Griswold (2006) states, the trend for women to wait until later in life to have children has perhaps contributed to number of those seeking fertility treatment today (p. 46). Daniluk (2011) adds, by 2003, percentage of Canadian women who were 30 years or older at time they had their first had jumped to 48% from 14% in 1983 (p. 40). Ehrenshaft (2005) points out that gay families, single parents, and infertile adults are some of those who choose surrogacy. Gay couples choosing to become parents contribute to increase in gestational surrogacy, and primary and secondary infertility of both men and women is also contributory factor. The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that, globally, 8-10% of couples experience infertility in their reproductive lives (Widge, 2005, p. 226). In Canada, 11.5% to 15.7% of couples who try to become pregnant experience infertility (Bushnik, Cook, Yupze, Tough, & Collins, 2012).Family composition and medical issues such as infertility are two main factors involved in choosing process of surrogacy. However, Nakash and Herdiman (2007, p. 246) add, other factors like age, health, or even poor odds play part in as an option for parenthood. Many women are deciding to delay childbearing to acquire increased financial stability or for career advancements, and this family planning postponement increases chances of infertility and health problems, which may result in families choosing gestational surrogacy.As well, gestational is often chosen because is no longer as viable an option for many intended parents, and maintaining family lineage is significant. According to Hanafin (2006), most couples choose out of desire to be connected genetically, to participate in pregnancy, and to know child's birthmother (p. 381). Edelmann (2004) explains further: a number of studies have noted expressed desire of infertile couples to have biological connection between and one of prospective parents rather than to adopt an unrelated child (p. 128). Furthermore, van Den Akker (2007) states that, in UK, adoption tends to be seen as last resort option, or second best choice (p. 55). Thus, desire for some people to have genetic connection is often important and prompts decision of gestational surrogacy. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,046 | 0,018 |
| Communication savante | 0,007 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,007 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,008 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».