Death in the clinic: women's perceptions and experiences of discarding supernumerary IVF embryos

S. D. Lacey
{"title":"Death in the clinic: women's perceptions and experiences of discarding supernumerary IVF embryos","authors":"S. D. Lacey","doi":"10.1111/1467-9566.12497","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Perspectives on the status of human embryos and whether they should be discarded differ globally. Some countries protect embryos in law while in other countries embryos ‘die’ or ‘succumb’ in assisted reproductive technology clinics on a daily basis. This study analyses interview data drawn from a larger qualitative study conducted in South Australia from 2004–2007. 21 women and 12 of 21 partners were interviewed about the decision they made to discard their embryos. The analysis reported here sought to examine the ways in which women constructed and experienced the decision to discard embryos. The article highlights the ways in which embryo discard is a contested discursive space. Embryo death is sequestered through their confinement in the laboratory and their invisibility to the naked eye. The clinic treated embryo discard as disposal of biological waste and failed to acknowledge the meaning of the event. By contrast women experienced emotional bereavement described as similar to early pregnancy loss, and described experiences of attachment and grief. For sensitive and compassionate care these differences in perceptions of embryo discard need to be addressed.","PeriodicalId":21851,"journal":{"name":"Sociology of Health and Illness","volume":"28 1","pages":"397-411"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociology of Health and Illness","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.12497","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Perspectives on the status of human embryos and whether they should be discarded differ globally. Some countries protect embryos in law while in other countries embryos ‘die’ or ‘succumb’ in assisted reproductive technology clinics on a daily basis. This study analyses interview data drawn from a larger qualitative study conducted in South Australia from 2004–2007. 21 women and 12 of 21 partners were interviewed about the decision they made to discard their embryos. The analysis reported here sought to examine the ways in which women constructed and experienced the decision to discard embryos. The article highlights the ways in which embryo discard is a contested discursive space. Embryo death is sequestered through their confinement in the laboratory and their invisibility to the naked eye. The clinic treated embryo discard as disposal of biological waste and failed to acknowledge the meaning of the event. By contrast women experienced emotional bereavement described as similar to early pregnancy loss, and described experiences of attachment and grief. For sensitive and compassionate care these differences in perceptions of embryo discard need to be addressed.
死亡在诊所:妇女的看法和经验丢弃多余的体外受精胚胎
关于人类胚胎的状况以及是否应该丢弃它们的观点在全球各不相同。一些国家在法律上保护胚胎,而在其他国家,每天都有胚胎在辅助生殖技术诊所“死亡”或“死亡”。本研究分析了2004-2007年在南澳大利亚进行的一项更大的定性研究中的访谈数据。21名女性和21名伴侣中的12名接受了采访,讨论了她们放弃胚胎的决定。这里报道的分析试图检查女性构建和经历丢弃胚胎决定的方式。文章强调了胚胎丢弃的方式是一个有争议的话语空间。胚胎的死亡被隔离在实验室里,肉眼看不见。该诊所将胚胎丢弃视为生物废物处理,未能承认该事件的意义。相比之下,女性经历的情感丧亲之痛被描述为类似于早期怀孕的丧失,并描述了依恋和悲伤的经历。对于敏感和富有同情心的护理,这些对胚胎丢弃的看法差异需要得到解决。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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