Corresponding author: Olga G. Isupova (
Academic editor:
Changes in society in the context of the information and technology revolution are also transforming the processes of reproduction of human, and humanity in general. The demographic processes are becoming more complex, the structures of kinship and family functions are changing, and so are the meaning and purposes of reproduction, or procreation, the ways of their description and regulatory mechanisms. Biotechnological prosthetics and the medicalization of human reproduction have required a comprehensive study and reflection of new social and moral experiences in various sciences, including humanities and sociological studies. There is a need to develop a conceptual apparatus that meets modern changes in the field of fundamental and applied knowledge about reproduction (of the body) of a person, reflecting the features of approaches of different sciences to innovations in this field. Practices and experience of theoretical studies of the second half of the 20th – early 21st centuries show that the main agents of modern market interaction are usually not individuals, but rather collective actors – organized entities, informal associations, communities, states as a whole. Institutionalized models of interaction between them can sustainably exist if they are constrained by the sense of moral obligation of most members of society (
The authors of the articles were aimed at coordinating philosophical, methodological, and interdisciplinary approaches to the discussion of fundamental and applied problems of procreation and transformation of sociocultural norms of human reproduction in the modern age of information and technology.
The special issue includes papers of philosophers working in the field of bioethics, Larisa Kiyashchenko and Tatiana Sidorova, demographers Nina Rusanova and Alexandra Moskaleva, demographic sociologist Olga Isupova, medical anthropologist Anna Ozhiganova and psychologist Svetlana Bronfman.
Larisa Kiyashchenko’s research note sets the task of building a chain of semantic relations between the key concepts of the transdisciplinary discourse practices in relation to the procreation effect. To reveal the connections in this field, the author gives a preliminary interpretation of concepts and semantic constructs forming a thematic thesaurus. Its key position is the concept of procreation, and its definition gets its outline in the ways and rules of discursive practice that promotes or obstructs the influence of procreation on the process of normogenesis in the transdisciplinary perspective.
Tatiana Sidorova’s paper concerns attitudes in the field of human reproduction. From the author’s point of view, scientific texts are dominated by an objectifying approach in explaining the causes of demographic changes, and values are considered as subjects separated from humans. The paper proposes a deepening of the axiological approach in understanding procreation, it is considered as human reproduction in the aspect of culture and persona genesis. Based on the axiological concept of Max Scheler and Vasily Rozanov’s personalist philosophy, the author proposes an interpretation of procreation as an intentional value attitude that manifests the positive directedness of a person to the future.
In her work, Nina Rusanova focuses on the economic and socio-demographic aspects of the functioning of the medical sector of reproductive technologies in Russia and the world. The author defines two main trends in Russia, namely, the expansion of the geography of reproductive centers along with the diversification of their services, and growth of the popularity of ART as methods of alternative conception in the absence of reproductive disorders, which intensifies public debate in this area, their critical focus in terms of religion and fears for the health of future generations. However, in conditions of low fertility, the state considers ART as a tool of pronatalist demographic policy and funds them even against the background of the coronavirus pandemic, which is causing serious economic damage to specialized reproductive clinics due to anti-epidemic restrictions.
Alexandra Moskaleva studies the problem of cost-effectiveness of ART in the regions of Russia and regional differences in the use of these opportunities by patients. The author finds a positive correlation between the average income in the region and the prevalence of reproductive technologies among residents, despite the State’s compensation of IVF costs. Considering the possibility of having a child, people are primarily counting on their own economic resources.
Olga Isupova devoted her paper to the study of the formation of new ethical approaches, terms, meanings, norms, and language in general – in the field of new forms of parenthood arising in connection with reproductive donation and surrogacy. Its main focus is the question of which parts of biological parenthood ART patients and ethics professionals find more permissible to delegate to third parties – genes or gestation, and what are the possible reasons for the prevalence of such an attitude.
Svetlana Bronfman’s study considers two extreme types of modern reproductive choice – combating infertility through assisted reproductive technologies and voluntary childlessness. The author draws upon the data of public opinion polls and studies of the process of normogenesis. We analyze the existing reproductive practices in their connection with procreative norms and new psychodynamic theories, such as transgenerational transmission of traumatic experience ± experience of violence and the resulting vulnerability in the 1990s generation due to problems in parental practices of the time. The author emphasizes that the new “shapeless” normativity, creating the illusion of “freedom to be oneself”, requires moral content, which has been abolished.
Anna Ozhiganova explores the ideological and practical direction, which can, in a certain sense, be considered the opposite of assisted reproductive technologies with the “artificiality” assigned to them in public discussions: natural childbirth. With all the seemingly archaic nature of this approach, it is very modern, it spread in the second half of the 20th century as a result of the accumulation of protest sentiments against excessive medicalization of the processes of pregnancy and childbirth. The author discusses discursive practices of official and alternative perinatal specialists: obstetricians and gynecologists, midwives of maternity hospitals, domestic midwives and doulas. In analyzing these practices, the author turns to the notion of “authoritative knowledge” proposed by Brigitte Jordan and Michel Foucault who went back to the concept of power-knowledge when considering the concepts
The diversity of approaches and attempts to understand changes in human reproduction presented in the papers is the primary result of cooperation within the project aimed at creating paradigmatic unity, embracing knowledge and skills of representatives of different scientific disciplines exploring the same topic. The project team sought to solve these problems through the harmonization of a conceptual terminological dictionary, or thesaurus, for discussion and research of innovations in the field of conception and childbirth technologies available to specialists and other participants in the process of procreation. The authors of the project aim at involving specialists from related sciences, especially economists, demographers, linguists and physicians, to consolidate efforts and further successful comprehension of relevant issues in procreation in the process of interdisciplinary interaction and popularization of the acquired knowledge and practices in society.
Research of