Literature DB >> 20835757

Authoritative knowledge, the technological imperative and women's responses to prenatal diagnostic technologies.

Judith L M McCoyd1.   

Abstract

Theories about authoritative knowledge (AK) and the technological imperative have received varying levels of interest in anthropological, feminist and science and technology studies. Although the anthropological literature abounds with empirical considerations of authoritative knowledge, few have considered both theories through an empirical, inductive lens. Data extracted from an earlier study of 30 women's responses to termination for fetal anomaly are reanalyzed to consider the women's views of, and responses to, prenatal diagnostic technologies (PNDTs). Findings indicate that a small minority embrace the societal portrayal of technology as univalently positive, while the majority have nuanced and ambivalent responses to the use of PNDTs. Further, the interface of authoritative knowledge and the technological imperative suggests that AK derives not only from medical provider status and technology use, but also from the adequacy and trustworthiness of the information. The issue of timing and uncertainty of the information also are interrogated for their impact on women's lives and what that can illuminate about the theories of AK and the technological imperative.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20835757     DOI: 10.1007/s11013-010-9189-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cult Med Psychiatry        ISSN: 0165-005X


  26 in total

1.  Refusing prenatal diagnosis: the meanings of bioscience in a multicultural world.

Authors:  Rayna Rapp
Journal:  Sci Technol Human Values       Date:  1998

2.  Is there a technological imperative in health care?

Authors:  Bjørn Hofmann
Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 2.188

3.  The implicit contract: implications for health social work.

Authors:  Judith L M McCoyd
Journal:  Health Soc Work       Date:  2010-05

4.  Prenatal genetic testing: content of discussions between obstetric providers and pregnant women.

Authors:  B A Bernhardt; G Geller; T Doksum; S M Larson; D Roter; N A Holtzman
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 7.661

5.  Reproductive technology and the commodification of life.

Authors:  B K Rothman
Journal:  Women Health       Date:  1987

6.  Women's decision-making in prenatal screening.

Authors:  P Santalahti; E Hemminki; A M Latikka; M Ryynänen
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 4.634

7.  'Because of the risks': how US pregnant women account for refusing prenatal screening.

Authors:  S Markens; C H Browner; N Press
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 4.634

8.  Discrepant feeling rules and unscripted emotion work: women coping with termination for fetal anomaly.

Authors:  Judith L M McCoyd
Journal:  Am J Orthopsychiatry       Date:  2009-10

9.  "I'm not a saint": burden assessment as an unrecognized factor in prenatal decision making.

Authors:  Judith L M McCoyd
Journal:  Qual Health Res       Date:  2008-11

10.  "What do you think about genetic medicine?" Facilitating sociable public discourse on developments in the new genetics.

Authors:  I Barns; R Schibeci; A Davison; R Shaw
Journal:  Sci Technol Human Values       Date:  2000
View more
  4 in total

1.  Expert Knowledge Influences Decision-Making for Couples Receiving Positive Prenatal Chromosomal Microarray Testing Results.

Authors:  M A Rubel; A Werner-Lin; F K Barg; B A Bernhardt
Journal:  Cult Med Psychiatry       Date:  2017-09

2.  Falling out: authoritative knowledge and women's experiences with pelvic organ prolapse.

Authors:  Lisa Kane Low; Julie A Tumbarello
Journal:  J Midwifery Womens Health       Date:  2012 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.388

3.  Termination of pregnancy for fetal anomalies: Parents' preferences for psychosocial care.

Authors:  Frederike H W Dekkers; Attie T J I Go; Luuk Stapersma; Alex J Eggink; Elisabeth M W J Utens
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2019-05-21       Impact factor: 3.050

4.  The influence of experiential knowledge and societal perceptions on decision-making regarding non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT).

Authors:  Sophie Montgomery; Zaneta M Thayer
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2020-10-19       Impact factor: 3.007

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.