Medical anthropology overwhelmingly reveals vulnerability as a problem of powerlessness. Vulnerable groups and individuals are those exposed to the pernicious effects of inequalities, injustices, and oppressive political realities. This largely pejorative stance, we argue, simplifies the place of vulnerability within human experience and in relation to the body, health and illness. By showcasing a range of interlocking vulnerabilities, this paper reveal the spectrum of positive and negative vulnerabilities that affect health and recovery. Through the concept of vulnerable articulations, this paper argues that health and illness experiences simultaneously create and require a range of different interconnected vulnerabilities, some of them harmful, and some of them life affirming. Ethnographically, this paper explore the concept of vulnerable articulations through two contrasting case studies: a group of British and New Zealand nuclear test veterans seeking compensation from the state, and clients of equine therapy in New Zealand. These case studies reveal that understanding human vulnerability requires a close attention to how people navigate between the diverse vulnerabilities that they face, and that attaining well-being often involves harnessing positive vulnerabilities in order to lessen the effects of damaging vulnerabilities.
There is little research documenting the experience of surrogate mothers in Aotearoa New Zealand, and no published studies to date have asked surrogates about the significance of financial benefit or compensation for their moral decision-making. In this article, we draw on qualitative data from in-depth interviews with 20 traditional and gestational surrogates, 20 intended parents, and 46 experts in the field of assisted reproduction about their views and experiences of surrogacy both within the national boundaries of the New Zealand fertility clinic setting and offshore. While altruistic procurement of reproductive materials and services is legally mandated in New Zealand, compensation and payment is prohibited. To support our analysis, we draw on the concept of bio-intimacy to discuss the production and management of relational work involved in altruistic surrogacy arrangements. We conclude that the economic circumstances for surrogates, where compensation for direct and indirect costs is absent or insufficient, need to be reconsidered.
The practice of traditional surrogacy gives rise to multiple discourses around women’s autonomy and kinship practices globally. In the Aotearoa New Zealand context, traditional surrogacy (where the surrogate donates her own egg as well as gestating the foetus) is legal only on an altruistic basis. Furthermore, it is subject to neither medical nor state oversight, unlike gestational surrogacy which is heavily regulated. Drawing on three years of ethnographic research, this article focuses on both traditional surrogates in Aotearoa New Zealand who have children of their own and those who have chosen a childfree life. Their narratives reveal multilayered motivations that align with and diverge from the ‘help’ narrative often associated with altruistic surrogacy. By drawing on and contributing to current debates on surrogacy globally, I show that traditional surrogates take on their role with clear ideas about kinship and different interpretations of reproductive participation. Their narratives bring to the fore the under-researched topic of traditional surrogacy, and in particular of women who do not want children of their own but choose to donate their eggs and gestate the foetus for another woman. I argue that their negotiation of stigma to make/resist kin disrupts pervasive heteronormative modes of kinship.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.