One of the most striking aspects of assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs) has
been their rapid globalization. Although ARTs may pose a range of (financial,
practical, emotional, psychological, as well as moral) challenges for both
providers and users, they have ultimately been embraced by many diverse
cultures. ARTs speak to the fundamental desire to become a parent, albeit in a
very particular way, and as such enjoy a wide global appeal that transcends many
cultural divergences. However, although ARTs may have become
‘global’, their practice in different parts of the world has been
subject to a range of limitations, modifications and prohibitions. These
context-specific ‘arenas of constraint’ have mediated and defined
the ways in which ARTs are offered to and received by local men and women, and
have set up specific relationships between technology and culture (Inhorn,
2002). Particularly during the last two decades, a wealth of research has been
dedicated to documenting the processes of ‘localization’ by which
ARTs have been reconfigured in different global contexts, including debates
regarding the morality and acceptability of certain technologies, the impact of
socio-economic circumstances, and the experiences of men and women undergoing
infertility treatment (for a review of this literature, see Inhorn and
Birenbaum-Carmeli, 2008). While this scholarship does not (yet) provide us with
a comprehensive survey of practices and attitudes regarding assisted
reproduction in all global locations, it nevertheless
highlights great cultural diversity through the exploration of a range of
similarities and differences, patterns and outliers. Within this broad picture
of cultural diversity in ARTs, the heterogeneity regarding reproductive donation
– in other words the use of donor sperm, donor eggs and surrogates
– is arguably the most varied, interesting and controversial.