dc.contributor.author | van Zyl, Liezl | |
dc.coverage.spatial | England | en_NZ |
dc.date.accessioned | 2009-04-06T22:05:41Z | |
dc.date.available | 2009-04-06T22:05:41Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2002 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Van Zyl, L L.(2002). Intentional Parenthood: responsibilities in surrogate motherhood. Health Care Analysis, 10(2), 165-175. | en |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/10289/2085 | |
dc.description.abstract | In recent years, a number of writers dealingwith questions over parenthood that arisein the context of reproductive technologies andsurrogate motherhood, have appealed to thenotion of ``intentional parenthood''. Basingtheir argument on liberal values such asindividual autonomy, the freedom to entercontracts, the right to privacy, and individualself-fulfilment, they argue that contractuallystated intentions, rather than genetic orgestational relationships, should form thebasis of parental rights. Against this I arguethat parental rights do not derive fromcontractual agreements, but are based in theirobligations towards the child. I then examinethe nature of the obligations that the variousparties have towards the child both pre- andpostnatally. | en |
dc.language.iso | en | |
dc.publisher | Kluwer Academic | en_NZ |
dc.relation.uri | http://www.springerlink.com/content/3bvx15l38tdeef7n/?p=23db90b2722a464588148489cb19c756&pi=2 | en |
dc.subject | children’s rights | en |
dc.subject | intentional parenthood | en |
dc.subject | liberal individualism | en |
dc.subject | parental rights and responsibilities | en |
dc.subject | surrogate motherhood | en |
dc.title | Intentional Parenthood: responsibilities in surrogate motherhood | en |
dc.type | Journal Article | en |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1023/A:1016550002211 | en |
dc.relation.isPartOf | Health Care Analysis | en_NZ |
pubs.begin-page | 165 | en_NZ |
pubs.elements-id | 30124 | |
pubs.end-page | 175 | en_NZ |
pubs.issue | 2 | en_NZ |
pubs.volume | 10 | en_NZ |