Islam and assisted reproduction treatments: an empirical study on the relationship between science and religion in Tangier and Barcelona
https://doi.org/10.18294/sc.2023.4492
Published
22 September 2023 
Rosa Martínez-Cuadros Doctor in Sociology. Postdoctoral researcher, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Barcelona, Spain.
Keywords:
Islam, Science, Religion, Reproduction Techniques, Bioethics
Abstract
In recent decades there have been significant developments in assisted reproduction techniques, which have aided couples with difficulties in having children. These techniques have been well received in different parts of the world, and Muslim countries have been no exception. Adopting sociologist Michèle Lamont’s theoretical perspective on “boundaries”, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 health professionals and Islamic community leaders in the cities of Tangier and Barcelona during 2022. The aim of this article is twofold: first, to analyze how key actors in the Muslim community conceive of the relationship between Islam and science; second, to explain how this understanding is negotiated in relation to assisted reproduction treatments. The article concludes with a consideration of the complexities related to drawing the line between the positions of science and religion, and emphasized the importance of examining empirical cases in order to better capture the complex relationship between these two spheres and gain a deeper understanding of existing bioethical debates.
References
1. Inhorn MC, Tremayne S. Islam, assisted reproduction, and the bioethical aftermath. Journal of Religion and Health. 2016;55(2):422-430. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-015-0151-1
2. Shabana A. Bioethics in Islamic Thought. Religion Compass. 2014;8(11):337-346. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/rec3.12137
3. Saniei M, Kargar M. Modern assisted reproductive technologies and bioethics in the Islamic context. Theology and Science. 2021;19(2):146-154. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14746700.2021.1910914
4. Barbour IG. Religion and science: historical and contemporary issues. San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco; 1997.
5. Gould SJ. Rocks of ages: Science and religion in the fullness of life. New York: Ballantine Books; 2002.
6. Gülker S. From “science and religion” to “transcendence in science”, or: What we can learn from the (history of) science and technology studies. In: Jones SH, Catto R, Kaden T, eds. Science, belief and society: international perspectives on religion, non-religion and the public understanding of science. Bristol: Bristol University Press; 2019. p. 103-126. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1332/policypress/9781529206944.003.0006
7. Jones SH, Catto R, Kaden T. Conclusion: Future directions in the sociological study of science and belief. In: Jones SH, Catto R, Kaden T, eds. Science, belief and society: international perspectives on religion, non-religion and the public understanding of science. Bristol: Bristol University Press; 2019. p. 289-298. DOI: https://doi.org/10.46692/9781529206968.015
8. Unsworth A. Discourses on science and Islam: A view from Britain. In: Jones SH, Catto R, Kaden T, eds. Science, belief and society: international perspectives on religion, non-religion and the public understanding of science. Bristol: Bristol University Press; 2019. p. 263–288. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1332/policypress/9781529206944.003.0013
9. Lamont M, Molnár V. The study of boundaries in the social sciences. Annual Review of Sociology. 2002;28:167-195. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.28.110601.141107
10. Lamont M. The dignity of working men: Morality and the boundaries of race, class, and immigration. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 2000.
11. Brubaker R. Categories of analysis and categories of practice: a note on the study of Muslims in European countries of immigration. Ethnic and Racial Studies. 2013;36(1):1-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2012.729674
12. Béliveau VG, Irrazábal G, Griera M. Salud y religiones: prácticas y sentidos en diálogo y disputa. Salud Colectiva. 2018;14:153-159. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18294/sc.2018.1958
13. Irrazábal G, Johnson MC. Reproducción asistida, gestación por sustitución y creencias: Un análisis desde las usuarias de tecnologías, los expertos religiosos y las regulaciones estatales en Argentina. Política y Sociedad. 2019;56(2):317-339. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5209/poso.59741
14. Chamsi-Pasha H, Albar MA. Assisted reproductive technology: Islamic Sunni perspective. Human Fertility. 2015;18(2):107-112. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/14647273.2014.997810
15. Serour GI, Dickens BM. Assisted reproduction developments in the Islamic world. International Journal of Gynaecology and Obstetrics. 2001;74(2):187-193. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-7292(01)00425-8
16. Ahmadi A, Bamdad S. Assisted reproductive technologies and the Iranian community attitude towards infertility. Human Fertility. 2017;20(3):204-211. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14647273.2017.1285057
17. Inhorn MC. Making Muslim babies: IVF and gamete donation in Sunni versus Shi’a Islam. Culture, Medicine and Psychiatry. 2006;30(4):427-450. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11013-006-9027-x
18. Inhorn MC. Fatwas and ARTs: IVF and gamete donation in Sunni v. Shi’a Islam. Journal of Gender, Race & Justice. 2005;(9):291-317.
19. Inhorn MC, Patrizio P, Serour GI. Third-party reproductive assistance around the Mediterranean: comparing Sunni Egypt, Catholic Italy and multisectarian Lebanon. Reproductive BioMedicine Online. 2010;21(7):848-853. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2010.09.008
20. Husain FA. Reproductive issues from the Islamic perspective. Human Fertility. 2000;3(2):124-128. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1464727002000198831
21. Inhorn MC, Tremayne S. Islam and assisted reproductive technologies: Sunni and Shia perspectives. New York: Berghahn Books; 2012.
22. Korfker D, Rooij F, Buitendijk S, Detmar S, Reis R. Infertility care in the Netherlands for Turkish and Moroccan Migrants: The role of religion in focus. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2014;1-13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5171/2014.913057
23. Obeisat S, Gharaibeh MK, Oweis A, Gharaibeh H. Adversities of being infertile: the experience of Jordanian women. Fertility and Sterility. 2012;98(2):444-449. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.04.036
24. Obeidat HM, Hamlan AM, Callister LC. Missing motherhood: Jordanian women’s experiences with infertility. Advances in Psychiatry. 2014:241075. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/241075
25. Griera M, Gras JM i, Clot-Garrell A, Cazarín R. Conspirituality in COVID-19 Times: A mixed-method study of anti-vaccine movements in Spain. Journal for the Academic Study of Religion. 2022;35(2):192-217. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1558/jasr.22390
26. Guhin J. Why worry about evolution? Boundaries, practices, and moral salience in Sunni and Evangelical high schools. Sociological Theory. 2016;34(2):151-174. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0735275116649220
27. Irrazábal G. Bioética y catolicismo: dificultades en torno a la constitución de una identidad colectiva. Religião & Sociedade. 2010;30:101-116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-85872010000100006
28. García Martín J, Delgado-Molina C, Griera M. “I’m going to do battle… I’m going to do some good”: Biographical trajectories, moral politics, and public engagement among highly religious young Catholics in Spain and Mexico. Sociology Compass. 2023;17(7):e13091. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.13091
29. Johnson MC. Los sentidos sobre los fetos y embriones: imágenes, discursos y tecnología en las experiencias de usuarias de TRHA en Argentina. Sexualidad, Salud y Sociedad. 2022;(38):e22210.
30. Irrazábal G, Olmos Álvarez AL, Johnson MC. Creencias y actitudes sobre los embriones: Tercer Informe de la Encuesta Ciencia, Salud, Creencias y Sociedad en contexto de pandemia Covid-19 en Argentina. Buenos Aires: CEIL-CONICET; 2022.
31. Irrazábal MG. ¿Bioética y religión?: Apuntes para comprender la imbricación de la bioética y lo religioso en la toma de decisiones en la Argentina contemporánea. Revista Americana de Medicina Respiratoria. 2016;3:290-297.
32. Culley L, Hudson N, Rapport F. Assisted conception and South Asian communities in the UK: public perceptions of the use of donor gametes in infertility treatment. Human Fertility. 2013;16(1):48-53. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/14647273.2013.773091
ISSN 1669-2381 (print version) | ISSN 1851-8265 (electronic version) | 2250-5334 (english edition)
Editor in chief: Viviana Martinovich
Publisher: Universidad Nacional de Lanús
Rector: Daniel Rodriguez Bozzani
29 de Septiembre 3901, Remedios de Escalada, Lanús (B1826GLC), Provincia de Buenos Aires, Argentina