{"title":"The effects of COVID-19 on imagined reproductive futures","authors":"Charlotte Abel","doi":"10.1057/s41292-023-00310-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Macro-level crises affect individual lives and behaviors. One of COVID-19’s many effects was to disrupt the way people imagined their own and their children’s’ futures or imagined reproductive futures . Using 65 interviews collected between March and July 2020 with mothers who experienced pregnancy, childbirth, and the postpartum period at the onset of COVID-19 in the US, this study examines two elements of reproduction and futurity; first, how the pandemic exacerbated health, economic, racial, and global emergency stressors to create unique reproductive experiences and nuanced imagined reproductive futures. Second, I use Lee Edelman’s concept of reproductive futurism amidst COVID-19 to inquire whether reproduction maintains a compulsory sense of optimism amidst periods of social disruption. I find that despite the various stressors and in addition to the shared disruption of the pandemic, there remains a widespread maternal optimism about reproduction across birthing people with different intersectional social identities. Diverse imaginations of futurity are likely to impact reproductive practices and the meaning-making associated with them; in this research, I use maternal subjectivities to illustrate how narratives and experiences of reproduction are contextual, and offer a distinct avenue toward theoretical analyses of futurity.","PeriodicalId":46976,"journal":{"name":"Biosocieties","volume":"56 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biosocieties","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41292-023-00310-1","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Abstract Macro-level crises affect individual lives and behaviors. One of COVID-19’s many effects was to disrupt the way people imagined their own and their children’s’ futures or imagined reproductive futures . Using 65 interviews collected between March and July 2020 with mothers who experienced pregnancy, childbirth, and the postpartum period at the onset of COVID-19 in the US, this study examines two elements of reproduction and futurity; first, how the pandemic exacerbated health, economic, racial, and global emergency stressors to create unique reproductive experiences and nuanced imagined reproductive futures. Second, I use Lee Edelman’s concept of reproductive futurism amidst COVID-19 to inquire whether reproduction maintains a compulsory sense of optimism amidst periods of social disruption. I find that despite the various stressors and in addition to the shared disruption of the pandemic, there remains a widespread maternal optimism about reproduction across birthing people with different intersectional social identities. Diverse imaginations of futurity are likely to impact reproductive practices and the meaning-making associated with them; in this research, I use maternal subjectivities to illustrate how narratives and experiences of reproduction are contextual, and offer a distinct avenue toward theoretical analyses of futurity.
期刊介绍:
BioSocieties is committed to the scholarly exploration of the crucial social, ethical and policy implications of developments in the life sciences and biomedicine. These developments are increasing our ability to control our own biology; enabling us to create novel life forms; changing our ideas of ‘normality’ and ‘abnormality’; transforming our understanding of personal identity, family relations, ancestry and ‘race’; altering our social and personal expectations and responsibilities; reshaping global economic opportunities and inequalities; creating new global security challenges; and generating new social, ethical, legal and regulatory dilemmas. To address these dilemmas requires us to break out from narrow disciplinary boundaries within the social sciences and humanities, and between these disciplines and the natural sciences, and to develop new ways of thinking about the relations between biology and sociality and between the life sciences and society.
BioSocieties provides a crucial forum where the most rigorous social research and critical analysis of these issues can intersect with the work of leading scientists, social researchers, clinicians, regulators and other stakeholders. BioSocieties defines the key intellectual issues at the science-society interface, and offers pathways to the resolution of the critical local, national and global socio-political challenges that arise from scientific and biomedical advances.
As the first journal of its kind, BioSocieties publishes scholarship across the social science disciplines, and represents a lively and balanced array of perspectives on controversial issues. In its inaugural year BioSocieties demonstrated the constructive potential of interdisciplinary dialogue and debate across the social and natural sciences. We are becoming the journal of choice not only for social scientists, but also for life scientists interested in the larger social, ethical and policy implications of their work. The journal is international in scope, spanning research and developments in all corners of the globe.
BioSocieties is published quarterly, with occasional themed issues that highlight some of the critical questions and problematics of modern biotechnologies. Articles, response pieces, review essays, and self-standing editorial pieces by social and life scientists form a regular part of the journal.