IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v245y2020ics0277953619306926.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Quantifying fertility? Direct-to-consumer ovarian reserve testing and the new (in)fertility pipeline

Author

Listed:
  • Kyweluk, Moira A.

Abstract

Frequently branded the “egg timer” or “biological clock test,” anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) testing for women is becoming widely available in the United States (US) through online, direct-to-consumer (DTC) testing services. The level of AMH in the blood reflects the remaining egg supply or “ovarian reserve”—a potential fertility indicator. AMH level is primarily used as a diagnostic tool prior to ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization (IVF) or oocyte cryopreservation (OC; i.e., egg freezing). This article describes the first ethnographic research on DTC ovarian reserve testing in the US, with a recruited sample of 21 participants interested in pursuing testing who consented to participant observation and semi-structured interviews. Fieldwork took place from January 2018 to July 2018 in Chicago, Illinois. Ethnographic cases explore how experiences with ovarian reserve testing are shaped by relationship status, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, racial/ethnic identity, and medical insurance coverage. Thematic analysis suggests that DTC ovarian reserve testing is a unique means of investigating fertility; participants felt empowered by receiving testing outside of traditional medical contexts. It was an alternative tool for family planning, particularly for LGBTQ + individuals and single women. However, participants experienced varying degrees of certainty about test results and the appropriate next steps to take to confirm fertility status, preserve fertility, or conceive, thus suggesting that DTC testing may confound reproductive decision-making. I argue that DTC ovarian reserve testing is a new tool in a larger medical and social project to mitigate anticipated future infertility and is an entry point into what I term the new (in)fertility pipeline encouraging entanglement with reproductive technologies across the lifespan. Due to its low cost and widespread availability, DTC ovarian reserve testing reaches a broader demographic, encourages testing across diverse identities and backgrounds, and increases awareness of more advanced assisted reproductive technology (ART), including egg freezing.

Suggested Citation

  • Kyweluk, Moira A., 2020. "Quantifying fertility? Direct-to-consumer ovarian reserve testing and the new (in)fertility pipeline," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 245(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:245:y:2020:i:c:s0277953619306926
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.112697
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953619306926
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.112697?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Becker, Gay & Nachtigall, Robert D., 1994. "'Born to be a mother': The cultural construction of risk in infertility treatment in the U.S," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 507-518, August.
    2. Petrakaki, Dimitra & Hilberg, Eva & Waring, Justin, 2018. "Between empowerment and self-discipline: Governing patients' conduct through technological self-care," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 213(C), pages 146-153.
    3. Jenkins, Gwynne L. & Inhorn, Marcia C., 2003. "Reproduction gone awry: medical anthropological perspectives," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 56(9), pages 1831-1836, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Billig, Miriam & Maor, Maya, 2024. "From the body as an object to embodied subjectivity: Social egg freezing as a personal definition rite among ultra-orthodox singles," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 348(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hampshire, Katherine R. & Blell, Mwenza T. & Simpson, Bob, 2012. "‘Everybody is moving on’: Infertility, relationality and the aesthetics of family among British-Pakistani Muslims," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 74(7), pages 1045-1052.
    2. Dimond, Rebecca & Stephens, Neil & Herbrand, Cathy, 2023. "Making patients political: Narrating, curating, enacting, and navigating the ‘idealised policy patient’," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 338(C).
    3. Alessia Bertolazzi & Katarzyna Marzęda-Młynarska & Justyna Kięczkowska & Maria Letizia Zanier, 2024. "Datafication of Care: Security and Privacy Issues with Health Technology for People with Diabetes," Societies, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-25, August.
    4. Krzysztof Bartosz Klimiuk & Dawid Krefta & Karol Kołkowski & Karol Flisikowski & Małgorzata Sokołowska-Wojdyło & Łukasz Balwicki, 2022. "Seasonal Patterns and Trends in Dermatoses in Poland," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-14, July.
    5. Panter-Brick, Catherine & Eggerman, Mark, 2018. "The field of medical anthropology in Social Science & Medicine," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 196(C), pages 233-239.
    6. Mifsud, Matthieu & Molines, Mathieu & Cases, Anne-Sophie & N'Goala, Gilles, 2019. "It's MY health care program: Enhancing patient adherence through psychological ownership," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 232(C), pages 307-315.
    7. Padamsee, Tasleem Juana, 2011. "The pharmaceutical corporation and the 'good work' of managing women's bodies," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(8), pages 1342-1350, April.
    8. Bernardi, Roberta & Wu, Philip F., 2022. "Online health communities and the patient-doctor relationship: An institutional logics perspective," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 314(C).
    9. Troels Kristensen & Kim Rose-Olsen & Christian Volmar Skovsgaard, 2020. "Effects of Point-Of-Care Testing in General Practice for Type 2 Diabetes Patients on Ambulatory Visits and Hospitalizations," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(17), pages 1-16, August.
    10. Hough, Carolyn A., 2010. "Loss in childbearing among Gambia's kanyalengs: Using a stratified reproduction framework to expand the scope of sexual and reproductive health," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(10), pages 1757-1763, November.
    11. Balta, Maria & Valsecchi, Raffaella & Papadopoulos, Thanos & Bourne, Dorota Joanna, 2021. "Digitalization and co-creation of healthcare value: A case study in Occupational Health," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    12. Daskalopoulou, Athanasia & Palmer, Mark, 2021. "Persistent institutional breaches: Technology use in healthcare work," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 289(C).
    13. Johnson, Katherine M. & Fledderjohann, Jasmine, 2012. "Revisiting “her” infertility: Medicalized embodiment, self-identification and distress," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(5), pages 883-891.
    14. Storeng, Katerini Tagmatarchi & Murray, Susan F. & Akoum, Mélanie S. & Ouattara, Fatoumata & Filippi, Véronique, 2010. "Beyond body counts: A qualitative study of lives and loss in Burkina Faso after 'near-miss' obstetric complications," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(10), pages 1749-1756, November.
    15. Denicolai, Stefano & Previtali, Pietro, 2020. "Precision Medicine: Implications for value chains and business models in life sciences," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:245:y:2020:i:c:s0277953619306926. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.