IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v62y2006i3p668-682.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The incubation of a social movement? Preterm babies, parent activists, and neonatal productions in the US context

Author

Listed:
  • Landzelius, Kyra

Abstract

This article explores health-based activism on the part of the US 'parents of preemies' movement, a mutual-help network mobilized around babies born precariously early and acutely dependent upon life-support incubators. The movement articulates two meta-agendas for parental empowerment: (1) the quest to access/exercise greater participatory inclusivity vis-à-vis the preterm baby within the biomedical domain; and, (2) the quest to secure/command greater representational authority over the preterm baby within the public domain. Seen in terms of the erosion of the status quo, it can be argued that the movement's tangible and intangible aims to chip away at these traditions have been softly revolutionary: heralding new working partnerships between medical practitioners and patients' families; radical shifts in the technological consciousness and competences of preemie parents; and cyborg changes in conventional categories of the person. Yet, seen in terms of a normative order of things, it can be argued that the movement has largely and willingly been "co/operated": meaning that it has been "cooperative," but equally "co-opted" and "operated into" the disciplinary trajectory of neonatal medicine as well as the historical march of biopolitics with its governance of the collective body populous. From this critical perspective, the movement qua social movement thus itself might be considered incubated--cocooned, gestated, disciplined--and brought into existence by the very powers and hegemonic (patriarchal) machinery that viable resistance might struggle to govern instead of serve.

Suggested Citation

  • Landzelius, Kyra, 2006. "The incubation of a social movement? Preterm babies, parent activists, and neonatal productions in the US context," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(3), pages 668-682, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:62:y:2006:i:3:p:668-682
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(05)00308-4
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

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

    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:62:y:2006:i:3:p:668-682. 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: 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.