“Tango for Two”: Women’s Interviews in Clinical Reproductive Practice

IF 0.2 4区 社会学 N/A HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Natalya Gramatchikova, I. Polyakova
{"title":"“Tango for Two”: Women’s Interviews in Clinical Reproductive Practice","authors":"Natalya Gramatchikova, I. Polyakova","doi":"10.15826/qr.2023.2.805","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article attempts to combine data obtained through interviews by a psychologist of female donors participating in an assisted reproductive technology program and interpret them through narrative analysis and communicative situation analysis. The article describes the structure of an oocyte-donor which has never been done before with reference to Russian-language material. An ethical platform for the study is openness to a new type of scientific knowledge that results from the interpretation of the informants’ answers who try to comprehend their motives to donate. The narrative analysis of 21 transcripts helps determine the roles of the interviewer and the informant at each stage and their contribution to the discussion-testing communicative situation. The interview includes several stages, such as “a window to the past”, at which the autobiographical narrative is recorded as comprehensively as possible; a description of the donor’s current state which focuses on strategies for solving problem situations; the interview ends with a series of thought experiments that allow the psychologist to assess the emotional stability of the potential donor and make a forecast regarding the prospects for long-term cooperation with the reproductive medicine clinic. The paper outlines the cases of participants’ cooperation and mismatches in building a credible and value-consistent autobiographical narrative that includes the donation experience. The authors seek to fit this experience into a broader value context, including a compensatory one related to the urgent problems of potential donors. Women’s answers help specify the concept of donor ‘multi-motivation’. The ambiguity of public opinion regarding donation as a reproductive medicine phenomenon is expressed in the fact that the availability of information for those who are aware of the issue co-exists with donors’ persistent reluctance to display their activity outside the inner circle. Research perspectives include the need to consider the narrative contribution of each participant in the situation of reproduction, i. e. physicians, donors, and recipient parents, and its further use in practice.","PeriodicalId":43664,"journal":{"name":"Quaestio Rossica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quaestio Rossica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15826/qr.2023.2.805","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"N/A","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article attempts to combine data obtained through interviews by a psychologist of female donors participating in an assisted reproductive technology program and interpret them through narrative analysis and communicative situation analysis. The article describes the structure of an oocyte-donor which has never been done before with reference to Russian-language material. An ethical platform for the study is openness to a new type of scientific knowledge that results from the interpretation of the informants’ answers who try to comprehend their motives to donate. The narrative analysis of 21 transcripts helps determine the roles of the interviewer and the informant at each stage and their contribution to the discussion-testing communicative situation. The interview includes several stages, such as “a window to the past”, at which the autobiographical narrative is recorded as comprehensively as possible; a description of the donor’s current state which focuses on strategies for solving problem situations; the interview ends with a series of thought experiments that allow the psychologist to assess the emotional stability of the potential donor and make a forecast regarding the prospects for long-term cooperation with the reproductive medicine clinic. The paper outlines the cases of participants’ cooperation and mismatches in building a credible and value-consistent autobiographical narrative that includes the donation experience. The authors seek to fit this experience into a broader value context, including a compensatory one related to the urgent problems of potential donors. Women’s answers help specify the concept of donor ‘multi-motivation’. The ambiguity of public opinion regarding donation as a reproductive medicine phenomenon is expressed in the fact that the availability of information for those who are aware of the issue co-exists with donors’ persistent reluctance to display their activity outside the inner circle. Research perspectives include the need to consider the narrative contribution of each participant in the situation of reproduction, i. e. physicians, donors, and recipient parents, and its further use in practice.
“双人探戈”:临床生殖实践中的女性访谈
本文试图结合一位心理学家对参与辅助生殖技术项目的女性捐赠者的采访获得的数据,并通过叙事分析和交际情境分析对其进行解释。这篇文章描述了卵母细胞捐献者的结构,这是以前从未参考过俄语材料。这项研究的一个伦理平台是对一种新型科学知识的开放,这种知识源于对试图理解他们捐赠动机的线人答案的解释。对21份成绩单的叙述性分析有助于确定面试官和举报人在每个阶段的角色,以及他们对讨论测试交际情境的贡献。访谈包括几个阶段,如“通往过去的窗口”,在这个阶段,自传叙事被尽可能全面地记录下来;对捐赠者当前状态的描述,重点是解决问题的策略;采访以一系列思维实验结束,这些实验使心理学家能够评估潜在捐赠者的情绪稳定性,并对与生殖医学诊所的长期合作前景做出预测。本文概述了参与者在构建包括捐赠经历在内的可信且价值一致的自传叙事方面的合作和不匹配案例。作者试图将这一经验纳入更广泛的价值背景中,包括与潜在捐助者的紧迫问题有关的补偿性经验。妇女的回答有助于明确捐助者“多重动机”的概念。公众舆论将捐赠视为一种生殖医学现象的模糊性表现在这样一个事实上,即了解这一问题的人可以获得信息,而捐赠者一直不愿在核心圈子之外展示自己的活动。研究视角包括需要考虑每个参与者在生殖情况下的叙述贡献,即医生、捐赠者和接受者父母,以及其在实践中的进一步使用。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Quaestio Rossica
Quaestio Rossica HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
70
期刊介绍: Quaestio Rossica is a peer-reviewed academic journal focusing on the study of Russia’s history, philology, and culture. The Journal aims to introduce new research approaches in the sphere of the Humanities and previously unknown sources, actualising traditional methods and creating new research concepts in the sphere of Russian studies. Except for academic articles, the Journal publishes reviews, historical surveys, discussions, and accounts of the past of the Humanities as a field.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信