Catching Babies in Prohibition States: Midwives' Accounts for an Illegal Profession

Suarez, Alicia; Bolton, M.

doi:10.1002/symb.339

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 33 publications

(75 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…If immigrants are not criminals, then the policy is a human rights abuse. This finding further extends the literature on aligning activity by showing how disalignment (Dellwing , ) can occur through accounts (Silva ; Suarez and Bolton ; Sykes and Matza ) of contested institutional practices.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 79%

“…Denials of victims are deployed by those who claim that one's “victim deserved the injury” (Scott and Lyman :51). Justification by comparison is used to defend oneself by pointing to others who have done worse things (Cromwell and Thurman ; Suarez and Bolton ). Finally, with a “condemnation of the condemners,” one undermines those who have accused one of wrongdoing (Sykes and Matza ).…”

Section: Disalignment and Stigma Contestsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Liminal Stigma and Disaligning Activity: Online Comments about Trump's Family Separation Policy

Silva

Flynn

2020

Symbolic Interaction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 2018, the Trump administration initiated a "zero-tolerance" border policy wherein they criminally prosecuted all individuals who were apprehended crossing the border without proper authorization. The policy change resulted in numerous migrant children being separated from their parents. Through a qualitative content analysis of 1500 YouTube comments made in response to CNN and ProPublica news coverage, we examine each side's aligning activity. Separation challengers claimed border crossers were innocent while condemning their opponents as racist, cruel, and otherwise shameful. Separation advocates bolstered their own claims of innocence by denying that the detainees are victims and condemning separation challengers as hypocrites, dishonest, complicit in illegal immigration, and generally loathsome. These findings show that, enabled by social media, aligning activity in stigma contests can produce a liminal stigma, where identities suffer the ideational aspects of stigma but not necessarily the loss of social status.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 79%

Section: Disalignment and Stigma Contestsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Liminal Stigma and Disaligning Activity: Online Comments about Trump's Family Separation Policy

Silva

Flynn

2020

Symbolic Interaction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Much scholarship has outlined these various aligning strategies such as, making excuses to absolve personal responsibility, denying of injury, rejecting an opponent's claims of victimhood, condemning the condemners (Scott and Lyman 1968;Sykes and Matza 1957). While much work on aligning activity focuses on micro level social interactions, aligning activity can also involve macro level collective processes as categories of individuals defend their conduct against the stigmatizing accusations of others (Silva 2007;Suarez and Bolton 2018).…”

Section: Immigration Debates As Stigma Contestsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Ideational Stigmatization of Immigration Detainees, Their Advocates, Captors, and Their Apologists in the Commentary Section of U.S. Newspapers

Silva

Flynn

2020

Genealogy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although the United States has long been criticized for its treatment of migrants, the family separations that resulted from the Trump administration’s “Zero Tolerance” policy drew particularly intense approbation and much media coverage in June 2018. One way to understand the conflict over this policy is to view it as a stigma contest where the status of a number of identities (migrant, immigration advocate, captor, policy apologist) are subject to a liminal stigma. Recent scholarship has documented how internet commenters disparage certain identities as they defend others. Through a qualitative content analysis of 172 opinion articles published in U.S. newspapers between 2009 and 2020, this article examines the ways that ideational stigmatization of immigrant detainees, captors, and nativists has and has not varied by time and arena of the public sphere. We find that many of the condemnations and denials found online are also prominent in editorials and op-eds. (e.g., detention as cruel, detainees as noncriminals, captors as racist, detainees as nonvictims,). The commentary section of U.S. newspapers, however, tended to defend the detainees and condemn their captors and nativist citizens. These findings provide a fuller record of how immigration detention and family separation were constructed during the Trump administration and a deeper understanding for the fervor of U.S. nativists.

show abstract

“…For example, CPMs can practice legally in only 36 states, though they do practice outside the law in many other states, where they are striving for legalization ( Davis-Floyd, 2018 ). Their questionable legal status in 14 states and low numbers in general potentially limit access to CPMs as primary care providers and curtail some women’s ability to plan a community birth ( Suarez and Bolton, 2018 ).…”

Section: Introduction: Factors Shaping Maternity Care Preferences and Barriers To Preferred Carementioning

confidence: 99%

Maternity Care Preferences for Future Pregnancies Among United States Childbearers: The Impacts of COVID-19

Gildner

Thayer

2021

Front. Sociol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted maternity care decisions, including plans to change providers or delivery location due to pandemic-related restrictions and fears. A relatively unexplored question, however, is how the pandemic may shape future maternity care preferences post-pandemic. Here, we use data collected from an online convenience survey of 980 women living in the United States to evaluate how and why the pandemic has affected women’s future care preferences. We hypothesize that while the majority of women will express a continued interest in hospital birth and OB/GYN care due to perceived safety of medicalized birth, a subset of women will express a new interest in out-of-hospital or “community” care in future pregnancies. However, factors such as local provider and facility availability, insurance coverage, and out-of-pocket cost could limit access to such future preferred care options. Among our predominately white, educated, and high-income sample, a total of 58 participants (5.9% of the sample) reported a novel preference for community care during future pregnancies. While the pandemic prompted the exploration of non-hospital options, the reasons women preferred community care were mostly consistent with factors described in pre-pandemic studies, (e.g. a preference for a natural birth model and a desire for more person-centered care). However, a relatively high percentage (34.5%) of participants with novel preference for community care indicated that they expected limitations in their ability to access these services. These findings highlight how the pandemic has potentially influenced maternity care preferences, with implications for how providers and policy makers should anticipate and respond to future care needs.

show abstract

Catching Babies in Prohibition States: Midwives' Accounts for an Illegal Profession

Cited by 4 publications

References 33 publications

Liminal Stigma and Disaligning Activity: Online Comments about Trump's Family Separation Policy

Liminal Stigma and Disaligning Activity: Online Comments about Trump's Family Separation Policy

The Ideational Stigmatization of Immigration Detainees, Their Advocates, Captors, and Their Apologists in the Commentary Section of U.S. Newspapers

Maternity Care Preferences for Future Pregnancies Among United States Childbearers: The Impacts of COVID-19

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About