Assisted Reproduction, Replacement Pregnancy and beliefs. An analysis from technology users, religious experts and state regulations in Argentina

  • Gabriela Irrazábal CEIL CONICET, Argentina
  • María Cecilia Johnson CIJS CONICET
Keywords: religion, catholicism, reproductive technologies, women

Abstract

This article contributes to the analysis of the relationship between reproductive technologies and religions. This allows a debate on the meanings of reproduction, sexuality, the family and the cultural significances about human life. We will work on three levels: regulations and legal discourses, religious experts and religious users of reproductive technologies. As methods, biographical interviews with users and documentary analysis of legislation, resolutions and judicial decisions and literature and courses on fertility in religious spaces are used. With the extension of the use of the reproductive technologies in Argentina, the Catholic religious experts propose an alternative that adapts to theological doctrine. However, women who consider themselves Catholic, decide to use the technologies by adapting the doctrine to their own convictions. This occurs within the framework of a process of individuation and autonomy and a minor influence of religious institutions in the private life of people, as indicated by the main social studies on religion.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Gabriela Irrazábal, CEIL CONICET, Argentina
Doctora en Ciencias Sociales por la Universidad de Buenos Aires, Investigadora de CONICET en el Programa Sociedad Cultura y Religión del CEIL.
María Cecilia Johnson, CIJS CONICET

Licenciada en trabajo social. Becaria doctoral de CONICET en en el Centro de Investigaciones Jurídicas y Sociales (CIJS).

View citations

Crossmark

Metrics

Published
2019-10-22
How to Cite
Irrazábal G. y Johnson M. C. (2019). Assisted Reproduction, Replacement Pregnancy and beliefs. An analysis from technology users, religious experts and state regulations in Argentina. Política y Sociedad, 56(2), 317-339. https://doi.org/10.5209/poso.59741