This study performs analyzes on how the techno-biopower in women with subfertility functions through bodily experiences of women with subfertility who give technologized birth and how they become subjective and ensure reproductive rights through the p...
This study performs analyzes on how the techno-biopower in women with subfertility functions through bodily experiences of women with subfertility who give technologized birth and how they become subjective and ensure reproductive rights through the performing process of technologized birth. Thus, it is focused on finding how political intervention can be applied to new reproductive technologies under the situations and circumstances of women with subfertility instead of absolutely denying or accepting new reproductive technologies.
The results of this study are as follows:
First, introduction and spread of new reproductive technologies, government's support for infertility couples, management of health, medical policy and form of the infertility market including infertility clinic and pharmaceutical industry are what influences the birth given by women with subfertility in terms of technology and society. It was in 1980s when in vitro fertilization started getting introduced into the Korean society, but it was in 1990s when rapid progress was made in technological and scientific research, and infertility clinic. In 2000s it was developed to the extent of biotechnology based on accumulated knowledge and technology, coupled with development during the 1990s. The rapid progress in auxiliary reproductive technologies including in vitro fertilization during the 1990s is influenced not only by technological factors but also by social factors. Married women influenced by the one child (or two children) policy during the 1970s and 1980s tried to practice contraception, which caused the crisis in maternity hospitals and efforts in the medical community against such crisis and maternal desire of women with subfertility led to introduction and expansion of auxiliary reproductive technologies, and development of infertility clinic. Expansion of medical and scientific research on reproduction, and its clinical application was a process that power controls and manages more molecular bodies and capital generate profits using medical and scientific knowledge and molecular bodies. To begin with, according to the study published in the journal of 'Korean Society for Reproductive Medicine', medical and scientific research, and its medical application were a series of processes expanding from women's bodies to men's bodies, from ova / sperm to immature ova / sperm or round spermatid, genes and chromosome, which is shown in the development of new cure. Government didn't support introduction and research of in vitro fertilization directly, but as contraception operation for one child (or two children) policy was practiced for infertility, it contributed to the technological development indirectly and medical insurance policy made an unintended contribution to the research of infertility operation and growth of infertility clinic.
In addition, government's support for infertility couples and management bill of reproductive cell consider molecular bodies as an object of control and management and make a considerable contribution to the expansion of medical power rather than consider health right and birth right of women with subfertility. Lastly, infertility- and body-related market along with the development of medical and scientific research let women with subfertility participate in more consumption labor and expand medical and scientific knowledge and bodies into the new field of making profit.
In conclusion, spread of new reproductive technologies, government's support for infertility couples, management of health, medical policy and infertility market including infertility clinic and pharmaceutical industry create the birth environment changing accordingly. Combining these factors guarantees authority of medical and scientific knowledge, and medical power justifying control and management of more bodies and expanding the field of making profit.
Second, the predominant representation for infertility and infertility operation may produce the social fear of infertility. By suggesting causes inducing infertility variously and extensively from biological factors to work environment, social environment factors, eating habits and life habit, it implies no one can be free from possibility of infertility. Such discourses on factors inducing infertility exert efforts to prevent fertility along with social, cultural stigma for infertility and ideology of normal families. In addition, women with subfertility are seen as women as an object of sympathy who can't have a baby in spite of desperation or as abnormal women who can't perform their own natural duty. On the one hand, women trying to give birth with the help of infertility operation are represented as 'maternity of will', becoming a mother after overcoming the economic burden or pain of surgery. However, on the other hand, while reproductive cell trade or surrogate mother became controversial, social and cultural factors forcing women to become a mother by all means are not condemned, but women violating social regulations in order to have children are blamed.
Infertility operation producing the social fear about infertility is understood as a technology of 'hope' and 'emancipation' from infertility. The technological image of hope and emancipation creates 'hope torture' for pregnancy and childbirth to women with subfertility and justifies the medical and scientific research of reproduction and its medical application. Representation of new reproductive technologies other than spread of technology of hope and emancipation emphasizes efficiency, success rate and speed of the surgery. While such efficiency and politics of speed are being discoursed, the scientific investigation is done in that what couldn't be done with existing technologies is possible now or global technological competitiveness is acquired. However, emphasis on efficiency and speed of infertility operation rationalizes the use of the surgery as a method to conceal or reduce uncertainty or imperfection and to overcome infertility. It also publicizes predominant technology and culture based on technology and science.
In conclusion, the predominant technology and culture for infertility and infertility operation produces the social fear about infertility and considers the surgery as an efficient technology of emancipation rationalizing the medical and scientific research, and its medical application. Such predominant technology and culture along with social, cultural stigma against infertility and ideologies of abnormal families encourages couples suffering from subfertility to pay more money and actively participate in the surgery. Therefore, the predominant technological, scientific culture rationalizing medical and scientific knowledge, and its technological application contributes to stable reproduction of patriarchal capitalism.
Third, women with subfertility get involved in and compete through technologized pregnancy and childbirth within changing birth environment and predominant technology-science-culture. In addition, technological, social conditions are not just predominant technological, cultural subject or object during the technologized childbirth, but they recognize new materiality of bodies, intervene and participate as a subject.
Above all, women with subfertility compromise with and resist against authority of medical and scientific knowledge, and medical power within the medical system. As the surgery continues, they experience uncertainty and imperfection of medical and scientific knowledge. In addition, judgement of medical team and judgement through bodily experiences compete with each other. Statistical probability and biological factors inducing infertility are standards to decide the medical and scientific conceivability, but women with subfertility make a various interpretation with multi-dimensional standards within social, environmental factors and their own life stories or experiences other than biological factors.
Sexuality and reproductivity of women with subfertility become a subject of medical, scientific control and management in each stage of pregnancy attempt by inducing ovulation, artificial insemination and in vitro fertilization. However, as the surgery is repeated, women with subfertility may make an active demand for medical and scientific explanation or diverse cures regarding their symptoms. In this way they participate in producing medical and scientific knowledge, and encourage them. Production, fertilization and implantation of healthy ova is decided by fertilization and cultivation labor of lab researcher(s) and cooperation between culture medium and cultivation conditions based on bodily management of women with subfertility. Although fertilization of reproductive cells and initial growth of embryo are transferred to a lab, the true source of childbirth lies in active participation in technologized childbirth and bodies of women with subfertility. Thus, medical team and women with subfertility are in a symbiotic relationship rather than in subordinate or hostile ones. For medical team, women with subfertility are the source of treatment, management and profits, but on the other hand, they are also the resource of knowledge to identify effectiveness and limitation of medical and scientific knowledge. Women with subfertility often follow the judgement of medical team based on medical and scientific knowledge, but they also compete with medical team by experiencing and interpreting bodily symptoms against it and contribute to production of medical and scientific knowledge.
Next, women with subfertility request supports from government and society outside the medical system and criticize problems of medical system. Furthermore, they abort the technologized childbirth and choose childless life or adoption. They urge the government to apply health insurance to infertility operation, during which their reproductive rights as strategical tool for maternity rather than for health rights are made up of use of technological science and medical approach.
In conclusion, women with subfertility participate in medical and scientific knowledge-production-labor and compete with medical and scientific knowledge of medical team continuously by experiencing in vitro fertilization, obtaining knowledge and exchanging information. In addition, technologized childbirth and subjectivity of women with subfertility are understood to actively get involved, strategically negotiate and resist instead of adapting to technological life power and internalizing its effects.