IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v66y2008i12p2544-2554.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What British women say matters to them about donating an aborted fetus to stem cell research: A focus group study

Author

Listed:
  • Pfeffer, Naomi

Abstract

This is the first investigation into what matters to British women when they think about donating an aborted fetus to research, and how stem cell research and therapies might influence their views. Tissue derived from the aborted fetus is considered "the right tool for the job" in some stem cell laboratories. Research using tissue derived from aborted fetuses is permitted in Britain, while deliberate abortion to provide fetal tissue for research is illegal. Investigators are advised to seek women's agreement to donate the fetus after they have signed the consent form for the abortion, and stem cell researchers seek fetuses aborted under the 'social' grounds of the Abortion Act 1967. This research was based on focus groups with women who had both had a termination and had not had a termination. It found that initial enthusiasm for the donation of the aborted fetus for medical research, which was understood as a good thing, diminished as participants gained information and thought more carefully about the implications of such a decision. Lack of knowledge about how aborted fetuses are treated as scientific objects in the stem cell laboratory provoked concerns about mishandling, and invoked in some participants what we have called the duty of care which women feel towards babies and children. The duty of care might apply to other research using aborted fetuses. But what makes stem cell research more troubling is its association with renewal, regeneration, and immortality which participants understood as somehow reinstating and even developing the fetus' physical existence and social biography, the very thing abortion is meant to eliminate. By the end of the focus groups, participants had co-produced a tendency to refuse to donate aborted fetuses.

Suggested Citation

  • Pfeffer, Naomi, 2008. "What British women say matters to them about donating an aborted fetus to stem cell research: A focus group study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 66(12), pages 2544-2554, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:66:y:2008:i:12:p:2544-2554
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(08)00077-4
    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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Parry, Sarah, 2006. "(Re)constructing embryos in stem cell research: Exploring the meaning of embryos for people involved in fertility treatments," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(10), pages 2349-2359, May.
    2. Williams, Clare, 2005. "Framing the fetus in medical work: rituals and practices," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 60(9), pages 2085-2095, 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. Ho, Shirley S. & Looi, Jiemin & Chuah, Agnes S.F. & Leong, Alisius D. & Pang, Natalie, 2018. "“I can live with nuclear energy if…”: Exploring public perceptions of nuclear energy in Singapore," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 436-447.
    2. Kent, Julie, 2008. "The fetal tissue economy: From the abortion clinic to the stem cell laboratory," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 67(11), pages 1747-1756, December.

    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. Kent, Julie, 2008. "The fetal tissue economy: From the abortion clinic to the stem cell laboratory," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 67(11), pages 1747-1756, December.
    2. 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.
    3. Saniei, Mansooreh, 2013. "Human embryonic stem cell science and policy: The case of Iran," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 345-350.
    4. Waldby, Catherine & Kerridge, Ian & Boulos, Margaret & Carroll, Katherine, 2013. "From altruism to monetisation: Australian women's ideas about money, ethics and research eggs," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 34-42.
    5. Becker, Andréa & Hann, Lena R., 2021. "“It makes it more real”: Examining ambiguous fetal meanings in abortion care," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 272(C).
    6. Roberts, Celia & Throsby, Karen, 2008. "Paid to share: IVF patients, eggs and stem cell research," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 159-169, January.
    7. Mirlesse, Véronique & Ville, Isabelle, 2013. "The uses of ultrasonography in relation to foetal malformations in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 168-175.
    8. Ehrich, Kathryn & Williams, Clare & Farsides, Bobbie, 2010. "Fresh or frozen? Classifying 'spare' embryos for donation to human embryonic stem cell research," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(12), pages 2204-2211, December.
    9. 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.
    10. Delaunay, Catarina & Gouveia, Luís & Santos, Mário JDS. & Morais, Rita, 2023. "(De)Bonding with embryos: The emotional choreographies of Portuguese IVF patients," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 321(C).
    11. 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.

    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:66:y:2008:i:12:p:2544-2554. 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.