Aborcja zarodka to zabicie dziecka. Z posłem Jarosławem Gowinem rozmawia Paulina Nowosielska-Kucharska 2009. http://ekai.pl/wydarzenia/x17960/polska-aborcja-zarodka-to-zabicie-dziecka/. Access: 20.02.2015.
Google Scholar
A l d e r s o n P. and Mo r r o w V. 2011. The Ethics of Research with Children and Young People. A Practical Handbook. London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi.
Google Scholar
A r d e n e r E. 2007. The Words of Prophecy and Other Essays. New York, Oxford.
Google Scholar
Ba n c h o f f T. 2011. Embryo Politics. Ethics and Policy in Atlantic Democracies. Ithaca, London.
Google Scholar
B e c k e r G. 2000. The Elusive Embryo. How Women and Men Approach New Reproductive Technologies. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London.
Google Scholar
C h r i s t e n s e n P. and J a m e s A. 2008. Childhood Diversity and Commonality. Some Methodological Insights. In P. Christensen and A. James (eds.), Research with Children. Perspectives and Practices. Abington, New York, 156–192.
Google Scholar
Di a s i o N. 2013. Remembrance as Embodiment in Contemporary Polish Memories. Polish Sociological Review 3 (183), 389‒402.
Google Scholar
Donum Vitae, The Instruction on Respect for Human Life in Its Origin and on the Dignity of Procreation 1987. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19870222_respect-for-human-life_en.html. Access: 10.07.2014.
Google Scholar
Du b o w S. 2011. Ourselves Unborn. A History of the Fetus in America. Oxford, New York.
Google Scholar
Em o n d R. 2005. Ethnographic Research Methods with Children and Young People. In S. Greene and D. Hogan (eds.), Researching Children’s Experience. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, 123–140.
Google Scholar
G a l l a c h e r L.-A. and G a l l a g h e r M. 2008. Methodological Immaturity in Childhood Research? Thinking Through “Participatory Methods”. Childhood 15 (4), 499‒516.
Google Scholar
G a r m a r o u d i Na e f S. 2012. Gestational Surrogacy in Iran: Uterine Kinship in Shia Thought and Practice. In M. C. Inhorn and S. Tremayne (eds.), Islam and Assisted Reproductive Technologies: Shia and Sunni Perspectives. New York, Oxford, 157–193.
Google Scholar
Życie religijne w Polsce. Wyniki badania spójności społecznej 2018. GUS. https://stat.gov.pl/obszary-tematyczne/inne-opracowania/wyznania-religijne/zycie-religijne-w-polsce-wyniki-badania-spojnoscispolecznej-2018,8,1.html. Access: 12.08.2019.
Google Scholar
Ha l l D. 2012. Questioning Secularization? Church and Religion in Poland. In D. Pollack, O. Müller and G. Pickel (eds.), The Social Significance of Religion in the Enlarged Europe: Secularization, Individualization, and Pluralization. Aldershot, 121–142.
Google Scholar
Ha r d m a n C. 2001. Can There Be an Anthropology of Children? Childhood 8 (4), 501–517.
Google Scholar
He n n e s y E. and He a r y C. 2005. Exploring Children’s Views Through Focus Groups. In S. Greene and D. Hogan (eds.), Researching Children’s Experience. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, 236–252.
Google Scholar
Ho l c J. 2004. The Purest Democrat. Fetal Citizenship and Subjectivity in the Construction of Democracy in Poland. Signs. Journal of Women in Culture, Society 3 (29), 754–782.
Google Scholar
Hu n l e t h J. 2011. Beyond On or With. Questioning Power Dynamics and Knowledge Production in “Child-Oriented” Research Methodology. Childhood 18 (1), 81–93.
Google Scholar
J a m e s A. 2007. Giving Voice to Children’s Voices. Practices and Problems, Pitfalls and Potentials. American Anthropologist 109 (2), 261–272.
Google Scholar
J a m e s A. and J a m e s A. 2008. Changing Childhood. Reconstructing Discourses of “Risk” and “Protection”. In A. James and A. James (eds.), European Childhoods: Culture, Politics and Childhood in the European Union. Basingstoke, 105–128.
Google Scholar
J a m e s A., J e n k s C., P r o u t A. 1998. Theorizing Childhood. Oxford.
Google Scholar
J a n s M. 2004. Children as Citizens. Towards a Contemporary Notion of Child Participation. Childhood 11 (27), 27–44.
Google Scholar
K a h n S. M. 2000. Reproducing Jews. A Cultural Account on Assisted Reproduction in Israel. Durham.
Google Scholar
K a y E. M. T., D a v i s J. M., H i l l M., P r o u t M. 2008. Children, Young People and Social Inclusion. Participation for What? Bristol.
Google Scholar
K o r o l c z u k E. 2011. Rodzicielstwo i demokracja, czyli prywatne jest zawsze polityczne. Kultura Liberalna 154 (52), http://kulturaliberalna.pl/2011/12/20/leonowicz-soltysiak-ksieniewicz-korolczukkim-rozmnazanie-polakow/#3. Access: 10.08.2018.
Google Scholar
K r a w c z a k A. 2014. Czego nie widać. Obszary przemilczeń w polskiej debacie o in vitro. In M. Radkowska-Walkowicz and H. Wierciński (eds.), Etnografie biomedycyny. Warszawa, 91–124.
Google Scholar
L e d e r A. 2014. Prześniona rewolucja. Ćwiczenie z logiki historycznej. Warszawa.
Google Scholar
L e e N. 2005. Childhood and Human Value: Development, Separation, and Separability. Maidenhead, Berkshire.
Google Scholar
Ma c i e j e w s k a -Mr o c z e k E. and R e i m a n n M. 2017: Kodeks dobrych praktyk w badaniach z dziećmi: O potrzebie tworzenia zasad badań z udziałem dzieci. Miscellanea Anthropologica et Sociologica 18:3, 11–23.
Google Scholar
Ma r c u s G. 1995. Ethnography in/of the World System: The Emergence of Multi-Sited Ethnography. Annual Review of Anthropology 24, 95–117.
Google Scholar
Ma r i a ń s k i J. 2010. Zmieniająca się przynależność do Kościoła katolickiego w Polsce wyzwaniem dla duszpasterstwa. In Baniak J. (ed.), Laikat i duchowieństwo w Kościele katolickim w Polsce: Problem dialogu i współistnienia. Poznań, 19‒46.
Google Scholar
Ma y a l l B. 2008. Conversations with Children. Working with Generational Issues. In P. Christensen and A. James (eds.), Research with Children. Perspectives and Practices. Abington, New York, 109–124.
Google Scholar
Me r i l l S q u i e r S. 2004. Liminal Lives. Imagining the Human at the Frontiers of Biomedicine. Durham, London.
Google Scholar
Mi s h t a l J. 2015. The Politics of Morality. The Church, the State, and the Reproductive Rights in Postsocialist Poland. Athens.
Google Scholar
Mo n k D. 2008. Childhood and the Law. In Whose “Best Interest?” In M. J. Kehily (ed.), Introduction to Childhood Studies. Berkshire, 177–197.
Google Scholar
Mo r g a n M., G i b b s S., M a x w e l l K., B r i t t e n N. 2002. Hearing Children’s Voices. Methodological Issues in Conducting Focus Groups with Children Aged 7–11 years. Qualitative
Google Scholar
Research 2, 5–20.
Google Scholar
O’ K a n e C. 2008. The Development of Participatory Techniques. Facilitating Children’s Views about Decisions which Affect Them. In P. Christensen and A. James (eds.), Research with Children. Perspectives and Practices. Abington, New York, 125–155.
Google Scholar
Opinie o dopuszczalności zapłodnienia in vitro 2015. CBOS, https://cbos.pl/SPISKOM.POL/2015/K_096_15.PDF. Access: 9.07.2017.
Google Scholar
Pashigian M. 2012. The Growth of Biomedical Infertility Services in Vietnam. Access and Opportunities. Facts, Views, Visions. Issues in Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Health. Monograph, 59‒63. http://www.fvvo.be/assets/270/09-Pashigian.pdf.
Google Scholar
Pierwowzorem in vitro jest Frankenstein. Rozmowa z bp. Tadeuszem Pieronkiem 2009, http://wiadomosci.onet.pl/pierwowzorem-in-vitro-jest-frankenstein/7exbs. Access: 21.02.2015.
Google Scholar
R a d k o w s k a -Wa l k o w i c z M. 2012. The Creation of “Monsters”. The Discourse of Opposition to In Vitro Fertilization in Poland. Reproductive Health Matters 20 (40), 30‒37.
Google Scholar
R a d k o w s k a -Wa l k owi c z M. 2013. Doświadczenie in vitro. Niepłodność i nowe technologie reprodukcyjne w perspektywie antropologicznej. Warszawa.
Google Scholar
R a d k o w s k a -Wa l k o w i c z M. 2014. Frozen Children and Despairing Embryos in the “New” Post-Communist State. Debate on IVF in the Context of Poland’s Transition. European Journal of Women’s Studies 21 (4), 1–16.
Google Scholar
R e i n h a r z S. 1992. Feminist Methods in Social Research. New York, Oxford.
Google Scholar
S h e p h e r -Hu g h e s N. 2004. Parts Unknown. Undercover Ethnography of the Organs-Trafficking Underworld. Ethnography 5 (1), 29–73.
Google Scholar
S t a i n t o n R o g e r s W. 2008. Promoting Better Childhoods. Constructions of Child Concern. In M. J. Kehily (ed.), Introduction to Childhood Studies. Berkshire, 141–160.
Google Scholar
S t e i n b o c k B. 2011. Life Before Birth. The Moral and Legal Status of Embryos and Fetuses. Oxford, New York.
Google Scholar
Tak dla leczenia niepłodności, NIE dla in vitro. 2014. CitizenGo, http://www.citizengo.org/pl/10988-takdla-leczenia-nieplodnosci-nie-dla-vitro. Access: 19.02.2015.
Google Scholar
Te r l i k o w s k i T. 2014. Wstrząsające świadectwo dziecka z in vitro. Wolałabym się nie narodzić, http://www.fronda.pl/a/wstrzasajace-swiadectwo-dziecka-z-in-vitro-chcialabym-sie-nie-narodzic,39049.html. Access: 1.06.2014.
Google Scholar
Va e l e A. 2005. Creative Methodologies in Participatory Research with Children. In S. Greene and D. Hogan (eds.), Researching Children’s Experience. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, 253‒72.
Google Scholar
We i n e r A. B. 1980. Reproduction. A Replacement for Reciprocity, American Ethnologist 7 (1), 71–85.
Google Scholar
Wo j a c z e k K. 2011. Model małżeństwa do lamusa? Kulturowe zagrożenia małżeństwa. Homo Dei. Przegląd Teologiczno-Duszpasterski 80 (3), http://www.katolik.pl/model-malzenstwa-do-lamusa-kulturowe-zagrozenia-dla-malzenstwa,22977,416,cz.html. Access: 12.12.2018.
Google Scholar
Z a n i n i G. 2011. Abandoned by the State, Betrayed by the Church. Italian Experiences of Cross-BorderReproductive Care. Reproductive BioMedicine Online 23, 565– 572.
Google Scholar
English
Język Polski
