Reconciling moral discourses on choice, risk and pronatalism: the politics of elective egg freezing in Singapore.

IF 1.8 3区 医学 Q2 FAMILY STUDIES Culture, Health & Sexuality Pub Date : 2024-08-17 DOI:10.1080/13691058.2024.2391936
Gracia J Lee
{"title":"Reconciling moral discourses on choice, risk and pronatalism: the politics of elective egg freezing in Singapore.","authors":"Gracia J Lee","doi":"10.1080/13691058.2024.2391936","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article examines the framing of choice, risk and pronatalism in Singapore's debate on elective egg freezing, beginning from the government's review of the ban in 2012 and ending in 2023 when the procedure was legalised. It demonstrates the possibility of reconciling liberal discourses on reproductive choice with technocritical discourses on egg freezing as a risky and oppressive pronatalist technology. While medical complications, false hope and commercial abuse were longstanding concerns in Singapore, these risks were perceived as reconcilable with choice through an age limit, mandatory counselling and comparative frames from the national and international regulatory context. Additionally, low fertility rates and efforts to advance gender equality enabled the reconciliation of choice and pronatalism as policy justifications, while the construction of female candidates' heteronormative reproductive desire framed pronatalism in women-centric ways. Such reconciliation was facilitated by Singapore's strong interventionist culture which normalises paternalism and pronatalism. Within this context and through actors' articulation of policy ideas, elective egg freezing was reinterpreted as a technology with manageable risks, and a hope technology for women and nation. A moral Singapore State which permits elective egg freezing while supporting the interests of women and society was thus co-produced by politicians, journalists and doctors.</p>","PeriodicalId":10799,"journal":{"name":"Culture, Health & Sexuality","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Culture, Health & Sexuality","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13691058.2024.2391936","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"FAMILY STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article examines the framing of choice, risk and pronatalism in Singapore's debate on elective egg freezing, beginning from the government's review of the ban in 2012 and ending in 2023 when the procedure was legalised. It demonstrates the possibility of reconciling liberal discourses on reproductive choice with technocritical discourses on egg freezing as a risky and oppressive pronatalist technology. While medical complications, false hope and commercial abuse were longstanding concerns in Singapore, these risks were perceived as reconcilable with choice through an age limit, mandatory counselling and comparative frames from the national and international regulatory context. Additionally, low fertility rates and efforts to advance gender equality enabled the reconciliation of choice and pronatalism as policy justifications, while the construction of female candidates' heteronormative reproductive desire framed pronatalism in women-centric ways. Such reconciliation was facilitated by Singapore's strong interventionist culture which normalises paternalism and pronatalism. Within this context and through actors' articulation of policy ideas, elective egg freezing was reinterpreted as a technology with manageable risks, and a hope technology for women and nation. A moral Singapore State which permits elective egg freezing while supporting the interests of women and society was thus co-produced by politicians, journalists and doctors.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
协调关于选择、风险和代孕的道德论述:新加坡选择性冷冻卵子的政治。
本文研究了新加坡关于选择性冷冻卵子的辩论中选择、风险和代孕主义的框架,从2012年政府对禁令的审查开始,到2023年冷冻卵子程序合法化为止。它展示了调和有关生育选择的自由主义论述与有关冷冻卵子是一种具有风险和压迫性的代孕技术的技术批判论述的可能性。虽然医疗并发症、虚假希望和商业滥用是新加坡长期关注的问题,但通过年龄限制、强制咨询以及国家和国际监管背景下的比较框架,这些风险被认为是可以与选择相调和的。此外,低生育率和促进性别平等的努力使选择与代孕主义得以调和,成为政策的理由,而女性候选人异性恋生殖欲望的构建则以妇女为中心的方式框定了代孕主义。新加坡浓厚的干预主义文化将家长制和代产主义正常化,为这种调和提供了便利。在此背景下,通过行动者对政策理念的阐述,选择性冷冻卵子被重新诠释为一种风险可控的技术,是妇女和国家的希望技术。因此,政治家、记者和医生共同创造了一个允许选择性冷冻卵子,同时支持妇女和社会利益的道德新加坡国。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
4.50%
发文量
80
期刊最新文献
Cultural taboos and low sexual and reproductive health literacy among university students in Magway city, Myanmar. (In)visibilising pregnancy loss in Southern Malawi. Girls' experiences of cellphone porn use in South Africa and their accounts of sexual risk in the classroom. Healthcare professionals' attitudes towards the termination of pregnancy: a qualitative analysis of survey data in Northern Ireland. Views and experiences of young women from a migrant or refugee background regarding the contraceptive implant in Australia.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1