IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v93y2013icp55-63.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Tensions around risks in pregnancy: A typology of women's experiences of surveillance medicine

Author

Listed:
  • Hammer, Raphaël P.
  • Burton-Jeangros, Claudine

Abstract

The experience of pregnancy is currently driven by the development of surveillance medicine focused on the monitoring of a wide range of risks. Research usually relies on binary categories opposing women accepting medical surveillance to those resisting it. Recent studies have however underlined the complexity of women's experiences, as well as the ambivalence of their attitudes toward medical procedures and recommendations. Based on 47 qualitative semi-structured interviews conducted in Switzerland between 2008 and 2009, this paper presents the diversity of pregnant women's experiences of surveillance medicine through the description of four contrasting groups: “endorsing surveillance medicine”, “coping with risks”, “striving for certainty” and “questioning surveillance medicine”. Taking into account various risks related to pregnancy, these empirically-grounded groups are discussed in relation to the cultural dynamics of contemporary risk discourses.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:93:y:2013:i:c:p:55-63
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2013.05.033
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953613003274
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2013.05.033?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. Bessett, Danielle, 2010. "Negotiating normalization: The perils of producing pregnancy symptoms in prenatal care," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 370-377, July.
    2. Ted To, 1999. "Risk and evolution," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 13(2), pages 329-343.
    3. 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.
    4. Markens, Susan & Browner, C. H. & Press, Nancy, 1999. "'Because of the risks': how US pregnant women account for refusing prenatal screening," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 359-369, August.
    5. 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.
    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. 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.
    8. Press, Nancy & Browner, C. H., 1997. "Why women say yes to prenatal diagnosis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 979-989, October.
    9. Barker, K. K., 1998. "A ship upon a stormy sea: The medicalization of pregnancy," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 47(8), pages 1067-1076, October.
    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. Hernandez, Elaine M. & Calarco, Jessica McCrory, 2021. "Health decisions amidst controversy: Prenatal alcohol consumption and the unequal experience of influence and control in networks," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 286(C).
    2. Timmermans, Stefan & Tietbohl, Caroline, 2018. "Fifty years of sociological leadership at Social Science and Medicine," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 196(C), pages 209-215.

    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. 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.
    2. Shaw, Alison, 2011. "Risk and reproductive decisions: British Pakistani couples' responses to genetic counselling," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 111-120, July.
    3. 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.
    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. Vassy, Carine & Rosman, Sophia & Rousseau, Bénédicte, 2014. "From policy making to service use. Down's syndrome antenatal screening in England, France and the Netherlands," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 67-74.
    6. Raspberry, Kelly Amanda & Skinner, Debra, 2011. "Negotiating desires and options: How mothers who carry the fragile X gene experience reproductive decisions," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(6), pages 992-998, March.
    7. Heyman, Bob & Hundt, Gillian & Sandall, Jane & Spencer, Kevin & Williams, Clare & Grellier, Rachel & Pitson, Laura, 2006. "On being at higher risk: A qualitative study of prenatal screening for chromosomal anomalies," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(10), pages 2360-2372, May.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. Gottfre[eth]sdóttir, Helga & Björnsdóttir, Kristín & Sandall, Jane, 2009. "How do prospective parents who decline prenatal screening account for their decision? A qualitative study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 274-277, July.
    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.
    12. Waring, Justin J., 2009. "Constructing and re-constructing narratives of patient safety," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 1722-1731, December.
    13. Fordyce, Lauren, 2013. "Accounting for fetal death: Vital statistics and the medicalization of pregnancy in the United States," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 124-131.
    14. Smith, Richard D., 2006. "Responding to global infectious disease outbreaks: Lessons from SARS on the role of risk perception, communication and management," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 63(12), pages 3113-3123, December.
    15. Wagner, Brandon G. & Cleland, Kelly & Batur, Pelin & Wu, Justine & Rothberg, Michael B., 2019. "Emergency contraception: Links between providers' counseling choices, prescribing behaviors, and sociopolitical context," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 242(C).
    16. Burkhard C. Schipper, 2021. "The evolutionary stability of optimism, pessimism, and complete ignorance," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 90(3), pages 417-454, May.
    17. Campbell, Patricia, 2011. "Boundaries and risk: Media framing of assisted reproductive technologies and older mothers," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 265-272, January.
    18. Pinar, Candas & Almeling, Rene & Gadarian, Shana Kushner, 2018. "Does genetic risk for common adult diseases influence reproductive plans? Evidence from a national survey experiment in the United States," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 218(C), pages 62-68.
    19. Miller, Tina & Boulton, Mary, 2007. "Changing constructions of informed consent: Qualitative research and complex social worlds," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 65(11), pages 2199-2211, December.
    20. Washer, Peter & Joffe, Helene, 2006. "The "hospital superbug": Social representations of MRSA," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 63(8), pages 2141-2152, October.

    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:93:y:2013:i:c:p:55-63. 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.