A Difference in Attitudes Toward Surrogacy between Chinese Students and the Dutch General Population in the Netherlands

Junling Xiang; Sanne Agterberg; Xianming Shi

doi:10.61187/ts.v1i2.41

Authors

Junling Xiang
auroraxjl@163.com
University of Amsterdam, Pedagogische Wetenschappen en Onderwijskunde, Roetersstraat 11, 1018 WB Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Sanne Agterberg University of Amsterdam, Pedagogische Wetenschappen en Onderwijskunde, Roetersstraat 11, 1018 WB Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Xianming Shi Tongji University, No. 1239, Siping Road, Shanghai, China

Keywords:

Surrogacy, Attitudes toward surrogacy, Chinese students, Dutch

Abstract

As surrogacy becomes increasingly available and public attitudes towards it wield significant influence on various societal aspects, investigating these attitudes becomes imperative. This study delves into whether Chinese students in the Netherlands harbor distinct attitudes towards surrogacy compared to their Dutch counterparts, and whether age serves as a moderating factor. Employing a questionnaire featuring a narrative, we collected data on surrogacy attitudes from 183 Chinese students (mean age=24.45, 76% female) and 65 members of the Dutch general population (mean age=35.64, 78.5% female). The moderation analysis results reveal a significant difference in surrogacy attitudes between the Chinese and Dutch participants (b =-3.02, t=-10.56, p<.001), with the Dutch exhibiting more favorable attitudes towards surrogacy. However, moderation analysis indicated no relationship between this disparity and participants' ages (b=.01, t=.31, p=.75). These findings suggest that cultural backgrounds may shape attitudes towards surrogacy, while age does not play a significant role. This research contributes insights into surrogacy attitudes among distinct cultural groups in the Netherlands.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Patel, N. H., Jadeja, Y. D., Bhadarka, H. K., Patel, M. N., Patel, N. H., & Sodagar, N. R. (2018). Insight into different aspects of surrogacy practices. Journal of Human Reproductive Sciences, 11(3), 212. https://doi.org/10.4103/jhrs.jhrs_138_17

Poote, A. E., & van den Akker, O. B. A. (2008). British women’s attitudes to surrogacy. Human Reproduction, 24(1), 139–145. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/den338

Yıldız, M., Felix, E. O., Ademiju, O., Noibi, T. O., Gomes, R. F., Tanimowo, A., Tayyeb, M., Khadka, R. B., Rhino, A., Yildiz, R., Ramazanzadegan, K., Yildirim, M. S., Solmaz, E., Haylı, Ç. M., & Şengan, A. (2023). Attitudes of different religions toward surrogacy: Analysis of 11 countries’ situation using machine learning approach and Artificial Neural Networks. Journal of Religion and Health, 62, 3230–3251. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-023-01782-y

Stöbel-Richter, Y., Goldschmidt, S., Brähler, E., Weidner, K., & Beutel, M. (2009). Egg donation, surrogate mothering, and cloning: Attitudes of men and women in Germany based on a representative survey. Fertility and Sterility, 92(1), 124–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.05.015

Peters, H. E., Schats, R., Verhoeven, M. O., Mijatovic, V., de Groot, C. J. M., Sandberg, J. L., Peeters, I. P., & Lambalk, C. B. (2018). Gestational surrogacy: Results of 10 years of experience in the Netherlands. Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 37(6), 725–731. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2018.09.017

Qiao, J., & Feng, H. L. (2014). Assisted reproductive technology in China: compliance and non-compliance. Translational Pediatrics, 3(2), 91–97. https://doi.org/10.3978/j.issn.2224-4336.2014.01.06

Nakash, A., & Herdiman, J. (2007). Surrogacy. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 27(3), 246–251. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443610701194788

Government of the Netherlands. (2022, November 10). Adoption possible from six selected countries. News item | Government.nl. Retrieved April 1, 2023, from https://www.government.nl/topics/adoption/news/2022/11/02/adoption-possible-from-six-selected-countries

Ahmadi, A., & Bamdad, S. (2017). Assisted Reproductive Technologies and the Iranian community attitude towards infertility. Human Fertility, 20(3), 204–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/14647273.2017.1285057

Pande, A. (2010). Commercial surrogacy in India: Manufacturing a perfect mother‐worker. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 35(4), 969–992. https://doi.org/10.1086/651043

Qi, Q., Gu, X., Zhao, Y., Chen, Z., Zhou, J., Chen, S., & Wang, L. (2023). The status of surrogacy in China. BioScience Trends. 17(4), 302-309. https://doi.org/10.5582/bst.2022.01263

Pieke, F. N., & Benton, G. (1998). The Chinese in the Netherlands. The Chinese in Europe, 125–167. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-26096-6_6

CBS. (2022). Population; sex, age, generation and migration background, 1 Jan; 1996-2022. CBS Statline. Retrieved March 25, 2023, from https://opendata.cbs.nl/statline/#/CBS/en/dataset/37325eng/table

Liu, Y., Xian, X., & Du, L. (2022). Perspectives on Surrogacy in Chinese Social Media: A Content Analysis of Microblogs on Weibo.? The Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine, 95(3), 305-316. https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/perspectives-on-surrogacy-chinese-social-media/docview/2721619289/se-2

Tang, Q. (2019). Surrogacy in china: Public opinion, litigations, and court rulings. Asian Social Science, 15(10), 84. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v15n10p84

van Beijsterveldt, C. E., Bartels, M., & Boomsma, D. I. (2011). Comparison of naturally conceived and IVF-DZ twins in the Netherlands Twin Registry: A Developmental Study. Journal of Pregnancy, 2011, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1155/2011/517614

Jiang, Q., & Liu, Y. (2016). Low fertility and concurrent birth control policy in China. The History of the Family, 21(4), 551–577. https://doi.org/10.1080/1081602x.2016.1213179

Noordhuizen, S., de Graaf, P. M., & Sieben, I. (2011). Explaining fertility norms in the Netherlands. Journal of Family Issues, 32(12), 1647–1673. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513x11409529

Logan, S., Gu, R., Li, W., Xiao, S., & Anazodo, A. (2019). Infertility in China: Culture, society and a need for fertility counselling. Asian Pacific Journal of Reproduction, 8(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.4103/2305-0500.250416

Xiao, Y., Li, J., & Zhu, L. (2020). Surrogacy in China: A dilemma between public policy and the best interests of children. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 34(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1093/lawfam/ebz018

CBS. (2020, June 29). Relatively many Chinese restaurant workers and students. Statistics Netherlands. https://www.cbs.nl/en-gb/news/2020/26/relatively-many-chinese-restaurant-workers-and-students

Cheung, B. Y., Chudek, M., & Heine, S. J. (2010). Evidence for a sensitive period for acculturation. Psychological Science, 22(2), 147–152. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610394661

Beglar, D. and Nemoto, T. (2014), “Developing likert-scale questionnaires”, JALT2013 Conference Proceedings, pp. 1-8.

LEE, S., CHOI, K.-S., KANG, H.-Y., CHO, W., & CHAE, Y. M. (2002). Assessing the factors influencing continuous quality improvement implementation: experience in Korean hospitals. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 14(5), 383–391. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/14.5.383

Harzing, A.-W., Brown, M., Köster, K., & Zhao, S. (2012). Response style differences in cross-national research. Management International Review, 52(3), 341–363. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11575-011-0111-2