IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v252y2020ics0277953620301453.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Negotiating risk and choice in multifetal pregnancies

Author

Listed:
  • Kaur, Navjotpal
  • Ricciardelli, Rosemary

Abstract

Today, across all aspects of societal living, risk assessment is an ever-present exercise. Pervasiveness of technology in the everyday life has caused the world of ‘risk’ to change tremendously, and this is particularly true for childbearing females. The social construction of pregnancy and childbirth as, arguably, medical events that necessitate medical intervention – ever more so for multifetal pregnancies – makes it almost impossible to avoid the notions of risk that surround the events. Drawing on semi-structured interviews with 41 mothers of twins or triplets, we investigate how understandings of risk, combined with the ideology of good motherhood and information provided by physicians impact perceptions of fetal reduction or termination. We have discussed and theorized empirical findings within the framework of risk, discourses of the responsibilization of females, and the potential ‘sacred child’ in a context where selective reduction becomes a potentiality.

Suggested Citation

  • Kaur, Navjotpal & Ricciardelli, Rosemary, 2020. "Negotiating risk and choice in multifetal pregnancies," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 252(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:252:y:2020:i:c:s0277953620301453
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.112926
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953620301453
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.112926?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. Williams, Clare & Alderson, Priscilla & Farsides, Bobbie, 2002. "Too many choices? Hospital and community staff reflect on the future of prenatal screening," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 55(5), pages 743-753, September.
    2. Getz, Linn & Kirkengen, Anne Luise, 2003. "Ultrasound screening in pregnancy: advancing technology, soft markers for fetal chromosomal aberrations, and unacknowledged ethical dilemmas," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 56(10), pages 2045-2057, May.
    3. Britt, David W. & Evans, Mark I., 2007. "Sometimes doing the right thing sucks: Frame combinations and multi-fetal pregnancy reduction decision difficulty," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 65(11), pages 2342-2356, December.
    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. van Blarikom, Esca & de Kok, Bregje & Bijma, Hilmar H., 2022. "“Who am I to say?” Dutch care providers' evaluation of psychosocial vulnerability in pregnant women," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 307(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. Williams, Clare & Ehrich, Kathryn & Farsides, Bobbie & Scott, Rosamund, 2007. "Facilitating choice, framing choice: Staff views on widening the scope of preimplantation genetic diagnosis in the UK," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 65(6), pages 1094-1105, September.
    2. Williams, Clare & Sandall, Jane & Lewando-Hundt, Gillian & Heyman, Bob & Spencer, Kevin & Grellier, Rachel, 2005. "Women as moral pioneers? Experiences of first trimester antenatal screening," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 61(9), pages 1983-1992, November.
    3. Ehrich, Kathryn & Williams, Clare & Scott, Rosamund & Sandall, Jane & Farsides, Bobbie, 2006. "Social welfare, genetic welfare? Boundary-work in the IVF/PGD clinic," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 63(5), pages 1213-1224, September.
    4. García, Elisa & Timmermans, Danielle R.M. & van Leeuwen, Evert, 2008. "The impact of ethical beliefs on decisions about prenatal screening tests: Searching for justification," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 66(3), pages 753-764, February.
    5. Valentine, Kylie, 2010. "A consideration of medicalisation: Choice, engagement and other responsibilities of parents of children with autism spectrum disorder," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(5), pages 950-957, September.
    6. Reid, Bernie & Sinclair, Marlene & Barr, Owen & Dobbs, Frank & Crealey, Grainne, 2009. "A meta-synthesis of pregnant women's decision-making processes with regard to antenatal screening for Down syndrome," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 1561-1573, December.
    7. Kyoko Murakami & Kumiko Tsujino & Masakatsu Sase & Masahiko Nakata & Misae Ito & Saeko Kutsunugi, 2012. "Japanese women's attitudes towards routine ultrasound screening during pregnancy," Nursing & Health Sciences, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(1), pages 95-101, March.
    8. Williams, Clare, 2005. "Framing the fetus in medical work: rituals and practices," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 60(9), pages 2085-2095, May.
    9. Vailly, Joëlle, 2008. "The expansion of abnormality and the biomedical norm: Neonatal screening, prenatal diagnosis and cystic fibrosis in France," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 66(12), pages 2532-2543, June.
    10. Graham, Ruth H. & Robson, Stephen C. & Rankin, Judith M., 2008. "Understanding feticide: An analytic review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 289-300, January.
    11. Gammeltoft, Tine & Nguyen, Hanh Thi Thuy, 2007. "Fetal conditions and fatal decisions: Ethical dilemmas in ultrasound screening in Vietnam," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 64(11), pages 2248-2259, June.
    12. Hammer, Raphaël P. & Burton-Jeangros, Claudine, 2013. "Tensions around risks in pregnancy: A typology of women's experiences of surveillance medicine," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 55-63.

    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:252:y:2020:i:c:s0277953620301453. 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.