1. Objectifs

Intentions :
This thesis documents «the diverse realities of ART [assisted reproductive technologies] access through in depth ethnographic research.» (p. 29) More specifically, this thesis «illustrate how ART access and availability is a contested arena that (re)produces kinship and gender relations in certain ways.» (p. iii)

Questions/Hypothèses :
The thesis aims to answer the following questions: «How was a recipient’s insertion into public ARTs reflective of cultural understandings of mothers, fathers, kinship and broader social relations? How was recognition by providers working under public ARTs connected with perceptions of a recipient’s gender and (prospective) kinship? How did this in turn shape recipients’ as well as providers’ understandings of “deservedness”?» (p. 2)

2. Méthode

Échantillon/Matériau :
This study is based «on participant observation at three clinical sites in Montreal (Quebec) between 2011 and 2013, and over 100 interviews with patients and a small group of providers,» (p. iii)

Instruments :
- Gide d’entretien semi-directif
- Grille d’observation

Type de traitement des données :
Analyse de contenu

3. Résumé

«This dissertation’s central premise is that social and cultural understandings of kinship and gender frame recipients’ inclusion or exclusion from public ARTs. These understandings are not uniform and are loosely based on a folk Euro-American model of kinship.» (p. 227) For example, this thesis considers «how ART access and availability force a re-examination of who may become a parent and new forms of reproductive autonomy. These forms of reproductive autonomy are intimately connected to the families people hope to form and their own self-determination in making medical decisions. When these diverge from clinical practice, they also entail new forms of stratified reproduction. [Moreover, the study considers] the demise of Quebec’s public ARTs. The end of the program further underscored the existence of stratified reproduction; an issue which dominated in the ensuing debates. The debates that ensured from an examination of institutional reports and transcripts privileged medical infertility over social infertility. This was a covert way of excluding recipients by making them responsible for past reproductive choices, while also erasing fertility doctors’ conflict of interests. In the end, the funding cuts legitimized two forms of exclusion documented in this dissertation tied to financial resources and maternal age. Hence, ART access and availability force us to reckon with the balance sheet of reproductive justice and those who stand to gain or lose when ARTs are publicly-funded.» (p. 228)