Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=774968
 
 

Citations (2)



 
 

Footnotes (46)



 


 



What's Wrong with a Parenthood Market? A New and Improved Theory of Commodification


Martha M. Ertman


University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law


North Carolina Law Review, Vol. 82, No. 1, 2003
U of Utah Legal Studies Paper No. 05-31

Abstract:     
Common sense tells us that parenthood is not and should not be for sale. Yet people routinely acquire parental rights and responsibilities for a price through adoption and reproductive technologies. Some commentators contend that these parenthood markets are the logical consequence of legal economic rhetoric, which, they assert, does not account for power disparities, nor the importance of alleviating them. Focusing on alternative insemination, this Article contends that a relatively unregulated parenthood market is beneficial because it facilitates formation of families on the basis of intent and function rather than biology and heterosexuality. Scholarly discourse on commodifying parenthood has overlooked these benefits, focusing only on dangers concerning eugenics, access, anonymity, and the objectification of children. This Article aims to correct this shortcoming in commodification theory, proposing an antiessentialist theory of commodification that accounts for both the benefits and dangers of the parenthood market. It concludes that thinking about commodification in a new way, one that recognizes the importance of particular contexts, allows us to think about privatization in general more coherently.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 39

Keywords: Family law, commodification

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: September 9, 2005  

Suggested Citation

Ertman, Martha M., What's Wrong with a Parenthood Market? A New and Improved Theory of Commodification. North Carolina Law Review, Vol. 82, No. 1, 2003; U of Utah Legal Studies Paper No. 05-31. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=774968

Contact Information

Martha M. Ertman (Contact Author)
University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law ( email )
500 West Baltimore Street
Baltimore, MD 21201-1786
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 969
Downloads: 161
Download Rank: 108,470
Citations:  2
Footnotes:  46

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo6 in 0.266 seconds