Lee Ellie, Macvarish Jan, Sheldon Sally
School of Social Policy, Sociology and Social Research (SSPSSR), University of Kent.
Sociol Health Illn. 2014 May;36(4):500-15. doi: 10.1111/1467-9566.12078. Epub 2014 Jan 4.
This article reports on a study with staff working in assisted conception clinics in the UK about making welfare of the child (WOC) assessments pre-conception. This aspect of infertility treatment is obligatory under section 13(5) of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act, which was amended in 2008. The aim of the study was to find out how this change to the law had impacted on practice. In describing what we found, we also make a contribution to scholarship about the medicalisation of reproduction. S13(5) has often been discussed as a prime example of medicalisation, giving clinics power to grant or deny access to treatment on child welfare grounds, encompassing far more than purely clinical considerations. Yet, while such medicalisation may be entrenched in the law, our findings suggest this power is used with a very light touch. Further, while our interviewees offered near-universal support for the need to consider child welfare, this is now justified by concerns that address not only family form (e.g. the need for a father figure) but also the quality of interactions between parents and children. In this light we suggest that the concept of medicalisation may offer a rather blunt tool for understanding a far more complex reality.
本文报道了一项针对英国辅助生殖诊所工作人员的研究,该研究围绕受孕前对儿童福利(WOC)的评估展开。根据2008年修订的《人类受精与胚胎学法》第13(5)条,不孕症治疗的这一方面是强制性的。该研究的目的是了解法律的这一变化如何影响实际操作。在描述我们的发现时,我们也为关于生殖医学化的学术研究做出了贡献。S13(5)经常被作为医学化的一个主要例子进行讨论,它赋予诊所以儿童福利为由批准或拒绝治疗的权力,其涵盖的范围远远超过纯粹的临床考虑因素。然而,虽然这种医学化可能在法律中根深蒂固,但我们的研究结果表明,这种权力的使用非常谨慎。此外,虽然我们的受访者几乎一致支持考虑儿童福利的必要性,但现在这种支持的理由不仅涉及家庭形式(例如需要父亲角色),还涉及父母与子女之间互动的质量。有鉴于此,我们认为医学化的概念可能是理解一个更加复杂现实的相当生硬的工具。