Biopower and Reproductive Loss
Biopower and Reproductive Loss
复制标题
生物动力和生殖损失
DOI：
10.1080/09502386.2013.840327
复制
发表时间：
2014
期刊：
影响因子：
1.5
通讯作者：
Sara L. Martel
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Sara L. Martel
广泛的研究表明，母亲尤其会为各种各样的损失而悲伤-流产、死产、宫外孕、人工流产、新生儿死亡-在所有的妊娠阶段，但往往发现她们的悲伤是无效的。反过来，缺乏对这些悲伤反应的支持或肯定可以被体验为死亡最初影响的加剧。这种痛苦的社会沉默，父母表达了他们的生殖损失的一部分，作为本文的基础，探讨了战略沉默和话语的知识网络构成的生殖损失在一个时代的生物权力。论文的第一部分概述了怀孕-未出生的身体的（生物）医学化，通过在18世纪早期使生育和女性身体社会化的性行为的部署来追踪这一过程。第二部分从风险技术的角度探讨了孕-未出生体的责任归属。在这里，我展示了死亡如何融入国家干预死亡率的话语，但作为一种战略性沉默，调动了责任伦理，同时从不透露生物能源的局限性或国家促进、保护和增强生命的承诺。第三部分转向两个话语策略，将怀孕的身体和胎儿的身体联系在责任上：产前护理和降低19世纪末和20世纪初西方社会的围产期死亡率。这些作为更具体的说明，如何生殖损失是采取了风险的政治，仍然是在今天的怀孕和分娩的生物医学理解。最后，我对生-未出生和死-死亡的相互身体性进行了一些反思，将失去生育能力的父母的斗争与生物权力时代超越生物医学对生和死的控制的更广泛的斗争联系起来。
Extensive research indicates that mothers in particular grieve a variety of losses – miscarriage, stillbirth, ectopic pregnancy, induced abortions, newborn deaths – at all gestational stages, yet often find their grief invalidated. In turn, the lack of support or affirmation of these grief responses can be experienced as an exacerbation of the initial impact of death. This painful social silence that parents have expressed as part of their reproductive loss serves as the foundation for this paper, which explores both the strategic silences and discourses in the network of knowledges constituting reproductive loss in an era of biopower. The first section of the paper outlines the (bio)medicalization of the pregnant-unborn body, tracing this process through the deployment of sexuality that socialized fertility and the female body in the early eighteenth century. The second section discusses the responsibilization of the pregnant-unborn body through the technology of risk. Here I show how death infuses the discourse of state intervention in mortality rates, but as a strategic silence mobilizing the ethics of responsibility while never revealing the limits of biopower or the state's promise to foster, protect and enhance life. The third section turns to two discursive strategies tying the pregnant body and the foetal body in relation of responsibility: antenatal care and the reduction of perinatal mortality in late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century Western societies. These serve as more specific illustrations of how reproductive loss is taken up in politics of risk that remains in the biomedical understanding of pregnancy and childbirth today. I conclude with some reflections on the intercorporeality of becoming-unborn and becoming-death, connecting the struggle of parents bereaved by reproductive loss with a broader struggle to move beyond the biomedical control of life and death in an era of biopower.