{"title":"Emotions of burden, intensive mothering and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy","authors":"Lisa Schuster, L. Gurrieri, Paula Dootson","doi":"10.1080/09581596.2022.2061917","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Addressing mothers’ vaccine hesitancy, which is a state of indecision rather than refusal, may become critical to public health responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Extant research separately examines how intensive mothering ideology and emotions interact with childhood vaccine hesitancy; however, little is known about the emotions at the intersection of motherhood and vaccine hesitancy. To address this, we seek to understand the emotions experienced by COVID-19 vaccine hesitant mothers who experience the societal pressures arising from the ideology of intensive mothering. Interviews (n = 30) were conducted with women in Australia who identify as mothers and self-report to have concerns about COVID-19 vaccination of their children. The findings suggest ‘emotions of burden’, specifically fear of being a ‘bad mother’ and anticipated guilt about failing to be a ‘good mother’, are experienced by mothers striving to meet societal expectations of intensive mothering though their vaccination decision. These findings provide a more nuanced understanding of mothers’ experiences in making vaccination decisions for their children and lends further empirical support to critiques of intensive mothering ideology as well as public perceptions of vaccine hesitant mothers. Practically, public health campaigns that avoid intimations of ‘bad mothering’ and acknowledge how emotionally burdensome the COVID-19 vaccination decision can be for vaccine hesitant mothers are indicated.","PeriodicalId":51469,"journal":{"name":"Critical Public Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09581596.2022.2061917","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
Abstract
ABSTRACT Addressing mothers’ vaccine hesitancy, which is a state of indecision rather than refusal, may become critical to public health responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Extant research separately examines how intensive mothering ideology and emotions interact with childhood vaccine hesitancy; however, little is known about the emotions at the intersection of motherhood and vaccine hesitancy. To address this, we seek to understand the emotions experienced by COVID-19 vaccine hesitant mothers who experience the societal pressures arising from the ideology of intensive mothering. Interviews (n = 30) were conducted with women in Australia who identify as mothers and self-report to have concerns about COVID-19 vaccination of their children. The findings suggest ‘emotions of burden’, specifically fear of being a ‘bad mother’ and anticipated guilt about failing to be a ‘good mother’, are experienced by mothers striving to meet societal expectations of intensive mothering though their vaccination decision. These findings provide a more nuanced understanding of mothers’ experiences in making vaccination decisions for their children and lends further empirical support to critiques of intensive mothering ideology as well as public perceptions of vaccine hesitant mothers. Practically, public health campaigns that avoid intimations of ‘bad mothering’ and acknowledge how emotionally burdensome the COVID-19 vaccination decision can be for vaccine hesitant mothers are indicated.
期刊介绍:
Critical Public Health (CPH) is a respected peer-review journal for researchers and practitioners working in public health, health promotion and related fields. It brings together international scholarship to provide critical analyses of theory and practice, reviews of literature and explorations of new ways of working. The journal publishes high quality work that is open and critical in perspective and which reports on current research and debates in the field. CPH encourages an interdisciplinary focus and features innovative analyses. It is committed to exploring and debating issues of equity and social justice; in particular, issues of sexism, racism and other forms of oppression.