Author
Listed:
- Emily Michaud
(Faculty of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Canada)
- Robin Oakley
(Department of Sociology and Social Anthropology, Dalhousie University, Canada)
Abstract
Also called oocyte cryopreservation or oocyte banking, “egg freezing” is an assisted reproductive procedure that allows people with ovaries to preserve oocytes for use in the future. “Medical egg freezing” has become established as a procedure for patients undergoing gonadotoxic chemotherapy or gynaecological surgery. In contrast, “social egg freezing” (SEF) is undertaken by patients with no current fertility issues in anticipation that they will be delaying childbearing. There is a sense that demand for SEF is growing, and it has been a rich case study for sociologists through lenses including medicalization theory, the nuclear family, intensive mothering, neoliberalism, ableism, and eugenics. Research presented in medical journals, recommendations made by clinical guidelines, and commentary and opinion pieces both reflect and shape the acceptability and availability of reproductive technologies. Therefore, the goal of this study was to explore narratives of SEF in Canadian medical journals and how these might shape medical perceptions of SEF. A qualitative, inductive content analysis of eight Canadian medical journal articles discussing SEF revealed key themes of “uncertainty,” “ethical conflict,” “age‐related fertility decline,” “extending fertility,” and “technological advancement.” A key finding of this study was that the boundaries between medical and social justifications for SEF are becoming blurred. On one hand, authors reframed SEF as a medical procedure indicated to manage age‐related fertility decline (which is pathologized). On the other hand, authors upheld SEF as a potential solution to broad social problems, including delayed parenthood.
Suggested Citation
Emily Michaud & Robin Oakley, 2025.
"Great Eggspectations: Narratives of Elective Oocyte Cryopreservation in Canadian Medical Journals,"
Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 13.
Handle:
RePEc:cog:socinc:v13:y:2025:a:10435
DOI: 10.17645/si.10435
Download full text from publisher
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:cog:socinc:v13:y:2025:a:10435. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.