6 research outputs found
Paternité gay et GPA : entre lien génétique et lien affectif
International audienceAbstract: Research framework : Alongside the "classic" fathers, genetically related to their child and the mother's spouse, there are adoptive fathers, single fathers, stepfathers, non-genetic fathers. Within this diversity appear gay fathers. But choosing gay parenthood is a relatively recent phenomenon that requires confronting a hostile legal and social environment and that challenges gender norms. Objectives : To explore representations of kinship and paternity, including whether or not the genetic link is important to gay fathers who have used gestational surrogacy. Methodology : The paper is based on interviews with 36 gay men in couple who have used surrogacy to become the father of a child or twins of about 4 months of age. Results : Because they are likely aware of the importance of genetic bonds in dominant social representations of parenthood, the interviewed fathers are very careful that their own relatives make no distinction between them. Some fathers go so far as to refuse to tell others about which father is biologically related to the child. Nevertheless, these dominant representations are not absent, especially at the moment of conception. Indeed, a number of them implanted embryos of each to give themselves a chance to have twins genetically linked to each of the fathers. In the case of a second surrogacy, they often want the second child (second twin or future pregnancy) to be of the father who has not given his sperm the first time. Conclusions : The gathered observations show that the representations of paternity are diversified and combine representations based on genetic ties with representations based more on daily parenthood. Contribution : The article highlights the complexity of paternity representations. These are not just about biogenetic links, but also about elective links.Cadre de la recherche : À côté des pères « classiques », reliés génétiquement à leur enfant et conjoint de la mère, il existe des pères adoptifs, des pères seuls, des beaux-pères, des pères non génétiques. Au sein de cette diversité apparaissent les pères gays. Mais choisir la paternité gay est un phénomène relativement récent qui nécessite d'affronter un environnement légal et social hostile et qui défie les normes de genre. Objectifs : Explorer les représentations de la parenté et de la paternité et notamment l'importance accordée ou non au lien génétique chez les pères gays ayant eu recours à une gestation pour autrui. Méthodologie : L'article s'appuie sur des entretiens menés auprès de 36 hommes gays en couple qui ont eu recours à la gestation pour autrui pour devenir père d'un enfant ou de jumeaux agés d'environ 4 mois. Résultats : Probablement conscients de l'importance accordée au lien génétique dans les représentations sociales dominantes, les pères interrogés sont très attentifs à ce que leurs proches ne fassent pas de distinction. Mais ces mêmes représentations ne sont pas absentes chez ces pères, notamment au moment de la mise en oeuvre de la conception. En effet, un certain nombre d'entre eux a implanté des embryons de l'un et de l'autre pour se donner une chance d'avoir des jumeaux génétiquement reliés à chacun des pères. Dans le cas d'une deuxième GPA, ils tiennent assez souvent à ce que le deuxième enfant (deuxième jumeau ou grossesse future) soit du père qui n'a pas donné son sperme la première fois. Conclusions : Les observations recueillies montrent que les représentations de la paternité sont diversifiées et combinent des représentations fondées sur l'engendrement avec des représentations davantage fondées sur la parentalité. Contribution : L'article met en évidence la complexité des représentations de la paternité. Celles-ci ne se résument pas aux liens biogénétiques mais accordent également une grande importance aux liens électifs. Mots clés : Pères gays, paternité génétique, gestation pour autrui, parentalité
Corrigendum: Determinants of Non-paid Task Division in Gay-, Lesbian-, and Heterosexual-Parent Families With Infants Conceived Using Artificial Reproductive Techniques.
[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00914.]
Paternité gay et GPA : entre lien génétique et lien affectif
International audienceAbstract: Research framework : Alongside the "classic" fathers, genetically related to their child and the mother's spouse, there are adoptive fathers, single fathers, stepfathers, non-genetic fathers. Within this diversity appear gay fathers. But choosing gay parenthood is a relatively recent phenomenon that requires confronting a hostile legal and social environment and that challenges gender norms. Objectives : To explore representations of kinship and paternity, including whether or not the genetic link is important to gay fathers who have used gestational surrogacy. Methodology : The paper is based on interviews with 36 gay men in couple who have used surrogacy to become the father of a child or twins of about 4 months of age. Results : Because they are likely aware of the importance of genetic bonds in dominant social representations of parenthood, the interviewed fathers are very careful that their own relatives make no distinction between them. Some fathers go so far as to refuse to tell others about which father is biologically related to the child. Nevertheless, these dominant representations are not absent, especially at the moment of conception. Indeed, a number of them implanted embryos of each to give themselves a chance to have twins genetically linked to each of the fathers. In the case of a second surrogacy, they often want the second child (second twin or future pregnancy) to be of the father who has not given his sperm the first time. Conclusions : The gathered observations show that the representations of paternity are diversified and combine representations based on genetic ties with representations based more on daily parenthood. Contribution : The article highlights the complexity of paternity representations. These are not just about biogenetic links, but also about elective links.Cadre de la recherche : À côté des pères « classiques », reliés génétiquement à leur enfant et conjoint de la mère, il existe des pères adoptifs, des pères seuls, des beaux-pères, des pères non génétiques. Au sein de cette diversité apparaissent les pères gays. Mais choisir la paternité gay est un phénomène relativement récent qui nécessite d'affronter un environnement légal et social hostile et qui défie les normes de genre. Objectifs : Explorer les représentations de la parenté et de la paternité et notamment l'importance accordée ou non au lien génétique chez les pères gays ayant eu recours à une gestation pour autrui. Méthodologie : L'article s'appuie sur des entretiens menés auprès de 36 hommes gays en couple qui ont eu recours à la gestation pour autrui pour devenir père d'un enfant ou de jumeaux agés d'environ 4 mois. Résultats : Probablement conscients de l'importance accordée au lien génétique dans les représentations sociales dominantes, les pères interrogés sont très attentifs à ce que leurs proches ne fassent pas de distinction. Mais ces mêmes représentations ne sont pas absentes chez ces pères, notamment au moment de la mise en oeuvre de la conception. En effet, un certain nombre d'entre eux a implanté des embryons de l'un et de l'autre pour se donner une chance d'avoir des jumeaux génétiquement reliés à chacun des pères. Dans le cas d'une deuxième GPA, ils tiennent assez souvent à ce que le deuxième enfant (deuxième jumeau ou grossesse future) soit du père qui n'a pas donné son sperme la première fois. Conclusions : Les observations recueillies montrent que les représentations de la paternité sont diversifiées et combinent des représentations fondées sur l'engendrement avec des représentations davantage fondées sur la parentalité. Contribution : L'article met en évidence la complexité des représentations de la paternité. Celles-ci ne se résument pas aux liens biogénétiques mais accordent également une grande importance aux liens électifs. Mots clés : Pères gays, paternité génétique, gestation pour autrui, parentalité
Recommended from our members
Corrigendum: Determinants of Non-paid Task Division in Gay-, Lesbian-, and Heterosexual-Parent Families With Infants Conceived Using Artificial Reproductive Techniques.
[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00914.]
Recommended from our members
Determinants of Non-paid Task Division in Gay-, Lesbian-, and Heterosexual-Parent Families With Infants Conceived Using Artificial Reproductive Techniques
Background: The division of non-paid labor in heterosexual parents in the West is usually still gender-based, with mothers taking on the majority of direct caregiving responsibilities. However, in same-sex couples, gender cannot be the deciding factor. Inspired by Feinberg’s ecological model of co-parenting, this study investigated whether infant temperament, parent factors (biological relatedness to child, psychological adjustment, parenting stress, and work status), and partner relationship quality explained how first-time gay, lesbian, and heterosexual parents divided labor (childcare and family decision-making) when their infants were 4 and 12 months old. We also tested whether family type acted as a moderator. Method: Participants were drawn from the new parents study. Only those who provided information about their biological relatedness to their child (N = 263 parents) were included. When infants were 4 months (T1), parents completed a password-protected online questionnaire exploring their demographic characteristics including work status and standardized online-questionnaires on task division (childcare and family decision-making), infant temperament, parental anxiety, parental depression, parental stress, and partner relationship satisfaction. When infants were 12-months-old (T2), parents provided information about task division and their biological relatedness to their children. Results: Linear mixed models showed that no factor explained the division of family decision making at T1 and T2. For relative time spent on childcare tasks at T1, biological relatedness mattered for lesbian mothers only: biologically related mothers appeared to spend more time on childcare tasks than did non-related mothers. Results showed that, regardless of family type, parents who were not working or were working part-time at T1 performed more childcare tasks at T1. This was still true at T2. The other factors did not significantly contribute to relative time spent on childcare tasks at T2. Conclusion: We had the opportunity to analyze the division of non-paid tasks in families where parenting was necessarily planned and in which gender could not affect that division. Although Feinberg’s model of co-parenting suggests that various factors are related to task division, we found that paid work outside the home was most important during the first year of parenthood in determining caregiving roles
Recommended from our members
Determinants of Non-paid Task Division in Gay-, Lesbian-, and Heterosexual-Parent Families With Infants Conceived Using Artificial Reproductive Techniques
Background: The division of non-paid labor in heterosexual parents in the West is usually still gender-based, with mothers taking on the majority of direct caregiving responsibilities. However, in same-sex couples, gender cannot be the deciding factor. Inspired by Feinberg’s ecological model of co-parenting, this study investigated whether infant temperament, parent factors (biological relatedness to child, psychological adjustment, parenting stress, and work status), and partner relationship quality explained how first-time gay, lesbian, and heterosexual parents divided labor (childcare and family decision-making) when their infants were 4 and 12 months old. We also tested whether family type acted as a moderator. Method: Participants were drawn from the new parents study. Only those who provided information about their biological relatedness to their child (N = 263 parents) were included. When infants were 4 months (T1), parents completed a password-protected online questionnaire exploring their demographic characteristics including work status and standardized online-questionnaires on task division (childcare and family decision-making), infant temperament, parental anxiety, parental depression, parental stress, and partner relationship satisfaction. When infants were 12-months-old (T2), parents provided information about task division and their biological relatedness to their children. Results: Linear mixed models showed that no factor explained the division of family decision making at T1 and T2. For relative time spent on childcare tasks at T1, biological relatedness mattered for lesbian mothers only: biologically related mothers appeared to spend more time on childcare tasks than did non-related mothers. Results showed that, regardless of family type, parents who were not working or were working part-time at T1 performed more childcare tasks at T1. This was still true at T2. The other factors did not significantly contribute to relative time spent on childcare tasks at T2. Conclusion: We had the opportunity to analyze the division of non-paid tasks in families where parenting was necessarily planned and in which gender could not affect that division. Although Feinberg’s model of co-parenting suggests that various factors are related to task division, we found that paid work outside the home was most important during the first year of parenthood in determining caregiving roles