IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v87y2013icp168-175.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The uses of ultrasonography in relation to foetal malformations in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Author

Listed:
  • Mirlesse, Véronique
  • Ville, Isabelle

Abstract

The world-wide diffusion of prenatal ultrasound has encountered local historical, cultural and political particularities. The purpose of this article is to study the varied uses of this technology in cases of detection of a foetal anomaly, in Rio de Janeiro, in a context of generalized access to ultrasound, restrictive legislation on abortion and major social inequalities. An ethnographic approach was chosen combining from 2009 to 2011, observations of prenatal consultations and interviews with specialist physicians and pregnant women, in both public and private sector institutions. Analysis of the data allowed us to identify three ideal-typical moments in the trajectory of the pregnant women when a foetal malformation was detected. The first moment occurs before the detection of the anomaly, when an initial ultrasound is carried out, essentially in private centres. The standardized actions of pregnancy monitoring are performed in the background while practitioners use the technology to support the local culture of praise to motherhood and the family. The second ideal-typical moment shows how detection of an anomaly leads to fragmentation of the foetus at the public referral centre for foetal malformations. But far from depersonalizing the consultation, the formalism of the diagnostic procedure is considered by some professionals as a political lever to empower women from poor neighbourhoods as they acquire knowledge and comprehension of the situation despite their lack of decisional autonomy. During the third ideal-typical moment, professionals put the data produced by the image into the larger perspective of the logic of care: the focus is no longer on access to knowledge and autonomy, but on the joint collaboration of women and professionals towards solving the problems of everyday life. The combination of these three moments in time illustrates a process whereby the malformed foetus is humanised, dehumanised and re-humanised with respect to the technological tool.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:87:y:2013:i:c:p:168-175
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2013.03.034
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953613002037
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2013.03.034?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. Novaes, Hillegonda Maria Dutilh, 2000. "Social impacts of technological diffusion: prenatal diagnosis and induced abortion in Brazil," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 41-51, January.
    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. Ville, Isabelle & Mirlesse, Véronique, 2015. "Prenatal diagnosis: From policy to practice. Two distinct ways of managing prognostic uncertainty and anticipating disability in Brazil and in France," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 19-26.

    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. 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.
    3. 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).
    4. 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.
    5. Ville, Isabelle & Mirlesse, Véronique, 2015. "Prenatal diagnosis: From policy to practice. Two distinct ways of managing prognostic uncertainty and anticipating disability in Brazil and in France," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 19-26.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. 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:87:y:2013:i:c:p:168-175. 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.