the problematics of motherhood in twentieth century women's fiction

How could anyone know what being a mother means
who has never carried a child nine months heavy
under her heart, who has never borne a baby in
blood and paln, who has never suckled a child, who
got that chlld out of a machine the way that
couple, white and rich, got my flesh and blood.
All made up already, a canned chlld, just add
money What do they know of motherhood? (WET.99)
To Connie tlll then, only a genetlc bond is capable of
sustaining an Ideal parent-chlld relationship
4.3.2.2. Connle's inltlal scepticism regarding reproductive
technology vanlshes as she beglns to compare the merlts of
artlflclal reproductlon with the llmltatlons of natural,
biological reproduction
Technological reproductlon In
Mattapolsett prevents motherlng from belng a llfe-tlrne lob,
therefore not demanding too m~ch of a person's tlme and
energy
Further, motherhood 1s not a compulsron only those
w~th an aptltude for ~ t those , confident of motherlng well,
take rt up
The people of Mattapolsett, moreover, rear a
c?-ild upto a certaln phase and leave her/hlm free after the
'end-of-mothering" stage (WET 107) as they belleve that a
chlld sometlmes has to do wlthout mothers
As opposed to
blologlcal parenthood, technologlcal reproductlon ensures
that the responslblllty of bearrng and rearlng a chlld does
not fall on the mother alone
4.3.3. TO Atwood, on the other hand, technologlcal
alternatives obstruct women's ernanclpation as they further