Selective Reproductive Technologies analyzes more broadly
what it means exactly to shape, discard, or choose your offspring and certain
qualities deemed worthy or better in a particular cultural context. In a world where elimination of deficiencies is
seen nearly as an obligation, the way these new technologies situation
themselves within the context of specific socio-cultural norms seems to only
reinforce certain qualities among certain societies. And as this juxtaposition plays out, the
author emphasizes a need for anthropological attention to the acceptance or
denial of reproductive possibilities within certain cultural, political, and
societal constructs and how/why technologies evolve in certain regions to way
they do. The other articles can be seen
as anthropological discourses for certain religious and cultural regimes and
how each has incorporated these new technologies in accordance with their
belief systems.
In the chapter Eggs and Wombs: The Origins of Jewishness,
Kohn analyzes how egg-related procedures such as in-vitro fertilization
challenge and play with “rabbinic and folk-cultural” understandings of what it
means to be a Jewish mother. In doing
so, analysis of an Israeli fertility clinic and its contextualization aligning
with the religious practices that provide a framework for clinical protocol, in
addition to analysis of interpretation dilemmas by Halakhic understanding posed
by ovam-related technologies and a debatably necessary fragmentation (whose
egg, womb, etc.), sheds light on what it is to be Jewish from birth in a
country where having Jewish parents is a strong qualifier for a) being Jewish
and b) consequently being an Israeli citizen.
In Making Muslim Babies, by Marcia Inhorn, further analysis
from the lens of Islam allows an exploration into both official and unofficial
religious discourses surrounding third-party donations in relation to in-vitro
fertilization. In addition, the article
analyzes the implications for Muslim marriages in relation to gamete donations. A unique factor at play in the article is the
different religious beliefs on the different sects of Islam, in both Lebanon
and Iran, leading to different interpretations in regards to both sperm and egg
donations, the lines drawn for each different for different sects. In particular, relating to third-party
donations, the 3 big issues of Islamic concern are moral marriage implications
for donation activities, the potential for incest among IVF babies, and moral
implications related to kinship, inheritances, and descent, major concerns for
a religion that privileges biological inheritance.
In Sacred Conceptions, analysis in regards to the Hindu
faith, and a certain lack of conceptual information provided by “Western”
scientists leads to a certain notion of theodicy, as developed by Weber, that
arises as a result of a discrepancy between how a religion explains or
justifies human suffering or fortune in relation to its tenants and how new
science logically complicates simple processes now thought to be unnatural
through technological intervening. The
argument is pushed further in that metaphysical explanations enable culturally
acceptable mechanisms for coping in behalf of clinicians and patients, drawing
on the idea of assisted contraception.
The author further points at a tendency in modern India to assimilate
different religious beliefs with techno-social beliefs of Euro-American
contexts. This, unlike the two above
pieces related to religion, serves to reveal a more malleable religious
doctrine, able to change with the technocratic imperatives of a rapidly growing
society.
In The Politics of Making Modern Babies in China, the focus
of the first comprehensive ethnography study of infertility and reproductive
technologies in modern China analyzes
how cultural imperatives centered on productive women members of society
needing exactly one (preferably male) child, Maoist social ideology, and
globalized market influences come to affect the expanse and frequency of using
new reproductive technologies. Unique to
China, it seems, is almost an imperative to go through this “high-tech”
baby-making process in an increasingly modern society that has increasingly
developed and implemented these technologies alongside the Chinese “modernity”
concept of low birthrate. In light of
this, an organizational principle develops almost under the radar as these
technologies are more frequently used with the concept of social ideals in
place. This occurs almost simultaneously with a sort of elitism, centered on
clinical settings in relation to sex selection, reproductive abilities at
large, and the idea of being a member of value by fitting in-line with the
ideals of a perfect Chinese child. Unique
to this article, in comparison to the other articles that contain an aura of
cultural religious motivations, is the fact that the bringing about of these
new technologies, similar to India’s acceptance of the technologies enforced by
a rapid globalization within the society, is driven by a subsurface urge to
justify these technologies by having them fit into the cultural norm; this is
instead of monitoring the appropriate types of reproductive technologies in
accordance with the unwavering conditions of religious consent long set up by
the individual cultures.
In the last article, Sonography and Sociality, focus is
concentrated on a unique juxtaposition of the continued and increasing use of ultrasound
scanning with a definite sense of uncertainty contained by these women when
using and receiving results from these technological implementations. Unlike the typically Euro-American belief
that ultrasounds are snapshots of the “baby” growing inside of a mother, in the
capital city, there is a general belief that this is a transitional image, not
capturing a hard point in time of the health conditions of the fetus (some
anxieties lead to a thought of harm to the baby through these
technologies). Even so, increasingly the
norm is to undergo such procedures to ensure simply a normal fetus development
in response to, or perhaps more importantly, regardless of, the precarious
nature a woman naturally understands when carrying for 9 months in her womb,
especially considering the local anxieties of necessarily successful
childbearing. This in turn creates an
aura around ultrasonographies as unstable sites where these anxieties are met
with and converse with a scientific “certainty” that is the ultrasound baby
snapshot.
A common theme I am fascinated with, which is exact in some
capacity within every article, is the situating of these technologies in a
grounded societal framework, whether religiously focused or not, that enhances, thwarts, or changes the conceptual
use of these technologies. It seems like
societies (India and China) that are more aware of their developing nature and
their supposed need or want to “keep up,” in a sense, to the rapid integration
of new technologies more quickly offer justifications and quick perceptions of
how use of these technologies fit into an already provided framework of
cultural expansion with cultural consistencies.
In contrast, the articles focusing on Israel and Muslim countries of
Lebanon and Iran seem to have a more difficult time drawing precise lines in
relation to firmly established religious doctrine. I believe evidence for this is given by how
the two different sects of Islam come about explaining and incorporating IVF
into societal norms aligning with religious coda. I would find it interesting if there were a
certain scale anthropologically speaking (I am not sure as my experience in
anthropological studies is relatively nil) that can situate certain societies
in comparison with each other based on their willingness to accept the
technology, routes of concern in establishing the use of the technology, and
the combination of both in how rapidly and widespread reproductive innovations
are incorporated for use. It seems like
a certain willingness to absorb such practices is rooted in a general sense of
technological globalization and a need to improve reproductive healthcare
within the given societies.
No comments:
Post a Comment