New mothers face a barrage of confounding decisions during the life-cycle of early motherhood which includes... Should they change their diet or mindset to conceive? Exercise while pregnant? Should they opt for a home birth or head for a hospital? Whatever they “choose,” they will be sure to find plenty of medical expertise from health practitioners to social media “influencers” telling them that they’re making a series of mistakes.
As intersectional feminists with two small children each, Bethany L. Johnson and Margaret M. Quinlan draw from their own experiences as well as stories from a range of caretakers throughout. You’re Doing it Wrong! investigates the storied history of mothering advice in the media, from the newspapers, magazines, doctors’ records and personal papers of the nineteenth-century to today’s websites, Facebook groups, and Instagram feeds. Johnson and Quinlan find surprising parallels between today’s mothering experts and their Victorian counterparts, but they also explore how social media has placed unprecedented pressures on new mothers, even while it may function as social support for some. They further examine the contentious construction of prenatal and baby care expertise itself, as individuals such as everyone from medical professionals to experienced moms have competed to have their expertise acknowledged in the public sphere.
Exploring potential health crises from infertility treatments to “better babies” milestones, You’re Doing it Wrong! provides a provocative look at historical and contemporary medical expertise during conception, pregnancy, childbirth, postpartum, and infant care stages.
I had a chance to interview the authors to learn more.
Why is it important to look at misconceptions and myths about parenting?
How is that food on your plate directly linked to health problems in the futures of the babies yet to arrive? At the dawn of epigenetics, new fears are emerging in a landscape (parenting) already riddled with causes for concern. However, scientists are about a decade from drawing clear linkages between ingested substances and intergenerational genetic expression. One of the reasons we feel compelled to discuss misconceptions and myths about health issues important to parents of young children, is that most parents probably feel like they are trying to stay ahead of a tidal wave of information, opinions and perspectives, especially in the age of social media, where every private Facebook mom’s group has members with many perspectives, each as confident their approach is right. The main reason we focus on what we call the “life cycle of early motherhood” because we understand the barrage of experts and expertise directed at individuals from pre-conception through the early toddlerhood years, when crises seem to be around every corner (e.g., infertility, high-risk pregnancy, premature birth, motor delays, etc.). We broadly define “motherhood” in order to include fathers, step-parents, same-sex or trans parents and other partners and we certainly acknowledge that social expectations encourage all caretakers to have an invested approach in the wellbeing and health of the family. However, throughout history, we acknowledge that most of the medical expertise was directed at females, particularly when it dealt with, reproduction and infancy.
How should people receive this book if they've been following the "wrong" approach? One of the great aspects about this book is your readers will not hear that from us on the “right” approach. This isn’t a parenting book, and we don’t forefront, highlight or support any one approach. In fact, we weave in our own narratives (sometimes referred to as autoethnography in our field) which are complicated and fraught with contradictions; we share our own experiences “doing it wrong” For example, one of us drank Diet Coke and consumed over the recommended coffee recommendations while trying to get pregnant, pregnant and breastfeeding and was shamed on social media by individuals whose commitment to organic eating made Diet Coke consumption alarming for them. One of never drank Diet Coke and didn’t get pregnant during four years of traditional and alternative fertility therapies—it turns out “just relax!” wasn’t helpful in getting pregnant either. The stories and incidents shared by interviewees in a series of studies we’ve conducted on practitioner-patient communication, health-related communities on Instagram, supportive messaging during infertility treatment explore how race, class, gender, ability complicate the “you’re doing it wrong!” messages individuals receive. We think so many people who read the book will find themselves (or friends or family members) in the stories we share from the past and the present.
What can parents do to make sure they're doing it right?
We don’t think parents need to strive to do it right. It sets up high expectations that put all at risk for failure. We hope this book reminds readers that children AND caretakers must be seen, heard and supported, particularly during what we call “the life cycle of early motherhood” (which includes anyone doing what is traditionally called “mothering”). This “cycle” begins at pre-conception and lasts through the early toddlerhood years, though many families begin the cycle again during these years as they welcome more children into their family, through birth, fostering, adopting etc. As we discuss throughout the book, we had different challenges and crises in our family—from episiotomies to dairy sensitivities, lip and tongue ties to anxious thoughts, we’ve been through a lot. And what worked with our children, our schedules, our family systems and our homes were different. And that isn’t wrong. Sure, we seek and sometimes follow the research and, but simply thinking about and wrestling with these issues, and what they mean for our families and our lives is “doing it right” in our view. We learned that correlation and causation might only be the same in social media comment sections. What we kept coming to over and over during this research is that the focus is on the individuals, instead of the systems, and that means the focus is accusatory not supportive or transformational. For example, in our pregnancy chapter, we talk about how gestating individuals are told to “avoid pollution” alongside a lot of scary yet vague language about toxins. No, we aren’t saying toxins aren’t doing damage and shouldn’t be a concern. But how does one person (particularly without class status, who might live in the most polluted areas) ensure they aren’t ingesting air pollution? Should I alone be held responsible for subjecting my child to the level of carbon monoxide in the atmosphere? We can increase self-surveillance (and with it, guilt and shame) but that act won’t clean the atmosphere. If we want pregnant individuals to be safe from air-borne toxins, it will take a communal, national and global effort to make the atmosphere safer for everyone. Commenters on social media often seem to have lost sight of the structural vs. individuals issues as well. It is so simple to pile on to a picture without context and tell someone they are doing it wrong. It is very difficult to dismantle and recreate structural inequalities, injustices that ensure these problems will continue.
Another great example is something like lactation support—it is all well and good to tell people to get themselves to a free La Leche League meeting. How incredible! FREE lactation support! But what about individuals without reliable transportation? We have to stop insinuating that if people simply cared more they would do x, y, and z, and start being realistic (and compassionate) about the real structural hurdles people face that prevent them from seeking options in the first place. And saying “fed is best” is helpful—but that doesn’t always consider the health needs of the person doing the breastfeeding. Bethany had insulin-resistant gestational diabetes with both her pregnancies, even following the diet religiously and working with her doctor (and healthcare team) to follow some new studies suggesting full-fat dairy helped maintain glucose levels for longer periods. But she knew the research said she could reduce her Type 2 diabetes rate 10 years out by 40% if she breastfed for 12 full months. So when she struggled so fiercely to keep her supply up after her second child, she felt like she was doing it for her own health as much as his. When supportive acquaintances and moms’ groups said “fed is best” she appreciated it, but felt like that narrative didn’t reflect her experiences either. Everyone has a unique story, and the ways we understand expertise as either “traditional” or “alternative” and the way we softly mock difference (“big pharma!” or “sorry I’m not crunchy enough!”) narrows our ability to draw simultaneously from a wide range of experts and forge new ways forward.
Bethany L. Johnson is an instructor in history and an associate member to the graduate faculty and research affiliate faculty in the department of communication studies at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. Margaret M. Quinlan is an associate professor of communication studies at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. I'd be happy to connect you with Bethany and/or Margaret for an interview. Thanks for your consideration and I hope to hear from you soon.
No comments:
Post a Comment