In recent years, researchers in the Nordic countries have increasingly come to adopt the label “medical humanities” to describe existing academic turfs on the intersections of health, culture, and society, and to bring forth new initiatives to engage with medicine from a theoretical and socio-cultural viewpoint and build collaboration with colleagues in biomedicine. Increasingly, the designation has proven to be useful in communicating to funders, university boards, and across faculties the potential of such interdisciplinary work. This is shown not least in how there are now several centers, research groups, and educational initiatives across the Nordics that use the term.

Being aware of factors that affect fertility can help people make informed decisions about their reproductive futures. To some, however, fertility information leads to worry and self-blame. In this paper, we explore how people from different generations discuss fertility and reproductive decision-making, along with their perceptions of fertility information. The study was conducted in southern Sweden with 26 focus-group discussions that included a total of 110 participants aged 17-90 years. The material was analysed thematically. Our results show that fertility knowledge and openness to talking about fertility problems have increased over generations. Participants who were assigned female at birth were more often concerned about their fertility than those who were not, and fertility concerns were transferred from mothers to daughters. While age-related fertility concerns had been uncommon in older generations, participants aged 25-40 often expressed these concerns. Young adults appreciated being knowledgeable about fertility but simultaneously expressed how fertility information could lead to distress. Our conclusion is that fertility information was best received by high-school students, and efforts to improve fertility education in schools are therefore recommended.

In the wake of the ongoing climate crisis and its negative effects on public health, it has been questioned by climate activists whether it is right to bring more children into the world. Moreover, according to previous scholarship, having one fewer child is the most high-impact lifestyle change individuals in developed countries can make in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. But do climate awareness and recommendations to have fewer children have any impact on how lay people reason around reproductive decision-making? In this paper, which is based on focus group discussions with people from different generations, we show how various and sometimes conflicting discourses on reproductive norms and responsibility are negotiated. Even though participants were highly aware of the ongoing discussions around the climate crisis, in the end it had little bearing on their decision to have children or not, and they justified reproduction through addressing other ways to contribute to a better world.

BACKGROUND

The overall purpose is to investigate how the COVID-19 pandemic has affected individuals who have been or are going through assessment or treatment for involuntary childlessness, and their processes of trying to have children. Previous research on involuntary childlessness in relation to the pandemic has mainly been medical and quantitative, and there has been a lack of qualitative studies that explore the subject area on a more indepth level. The study is a project in ReproUnion, Challenge 5.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this qualitative study, we used semistructured interviews to collect data. The study includes individuals who have been or are going through assessment or treatment for involuntary childlessness in Sweden and Denmark during the pandemic. Participants were recruited from both public and private care. 26 individuals took part in the study, of which 18 women and eight men. The participants were between 24 53 years old and the sample consisted of both heterosexual and same sex couples. The interviews addressed experiences of assessment and treatment of involuntary childlessness during the COVID-19 pandemic in relation to e.g.access to care, socioeconomic factors and intimate relationships.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

The preliminary results show that the pandemic has affected the patients in many ways and made an already challenging process even more difficult.Obstacles mentioned are for example limit access to care with longer queues and uncertainty regarding when the treatment can be resumed. Many of the respondents has also suffered from the absence of partners during care visits. Furthermore, the fear of being infected by the Corona virus, which could cause the treatment to be postponed, has led to isolation and often a weaker support from family and friends. However, these negative consequences have affected patients to varying degrees, some worse than others. The results also show that the pandemic brought some positive consequences. For example, the isolation has been perceived as a relief for some as they easier could avoid being exposed to other people’s pregnancies as well as attending baptisms and baby showers.

“It has been extremely stressful for me to hear those messages [about delays of the treatment from the clinic], as it has taken so long to get started , and, yes, I am not getting any younger. That's how I feel. For every six months that goes by, I have kind of lost a chance to get pregnant.”

"We are young and have no underlying health problems, but we still really had to isolate ourselves, and we were very afraid that we would catch a cold or suffer from Corona so that the treatments would be cancelled. So, it was all the time that you were afraid to meet people, and you were afraid to meet your friends”

“I think the biggest impact was that I was not allowed to accompany and that I was not allowed to participate, also in combination with this stress that you could get sick. That was probably thebiggest impact for me and my wife.”

CONTACT

Ida Elisabet Hall

Research assistant, social worker, master in sexology

Centre for Sexology and Sexuality Studies, Malmö University

ida.hall@mau.se

BACKGROUND

The overall purpose is to investigate how the COVID-19 pandemic has affected individuals who have been or are going through assessment or treatment for involuntary childlessness, and their processes of trying to have children. Previous research on involuntary childlessness in relation to the pandemic has mainly been medical and quantitative, and there has been a lack of qualitative studies that explore the subject area on a more indepth level. The study is a project in ReproUnion, Challenge 5.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this qualitative study, we used semistructured interviews to collect data. The study includes individuals who have been or are going through assessment or treatment for involuntary childlessness in Sweden and Denmark during the pandemic. Participants were recruited from both public and private care. 26 individuals took part in the study, of which 18 women and eight men. The participants were between 24 53 years old and the sample consisted of both heterosexual and same sex couples. The interviews addressed experiences of assessment and treatment of involuntary childlessness during the COVID-19 pandemic in relation to e.g.access to care, socioeconomic factors and intimate relationships.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

The preliminary results show that the pandemic has affected the patients in many ways and made an already challenging process even more difficult.Obstacles mentioned are for example limit access to care with longer queues and uncertainty regarding when the treatment can be resumed. Many of the respondents has also suffered from the absence of partners during care visits. Furthermore, the fear of being infected by the Corona virus, which could cause the treatment to be postponed, has led to isolation and often a weaker support from family and friends. However, these negative consequences have affected patients to varying degrees, some worse than others. The results also show that the pandemic brought some positive consequences. For example, the isolation has been perceived as a relief for some as they easier could avoid being exposed to other people’s pregnancies as well as attending baptisms and baby showers.

“It has been extremely stressful for me to hear those messages [about delays of the treatment from the clinic], as it has taken so long to get started , and, yes, I am not getting any younger. That's how I feel. For every six months that goes by, I have kind of lost a chance to get pregnant.”

"We are young and have no underlying health problems, but we still really had to isolate ourselves, and we were very afraid that we would catch a cold or suffer from Corona so that the treatments would be cancelled. So, it was all the time that you were afraid to meet people, and you were afraid to meet your friends”

“I think the biggest impact was that I was not allowed to accompany and that I was not allowed to participate, also in combination with this stress that you could get sick. That was probably thebiggest impact for me and my wife.”

CONTACT

Ida Elisabet Hall

Research assistant, social worker, master in sexology

Centre for Sexology and Sexuality Studies, Malmö University

ida.hall@mau.se

Reproductive decision-making and fertility patterns change with time and place, and are influenced by contemporary societal factors. In this paper, we have studied biosocial aspects of reproductive decision-making over time and generations in a Nordic setting. The aim was to explore intergenerational changes and influences on decision-making, especially regarding preconditions to first birth. Twenty-six focus group interviews were conducted in southern Sweden, including a total of 110 participants aged 17–90 years. The analysis of the interviews resulted in six themes: (i) ‘Providing security – an intergenerational precondition’; (ii) ‘A growing smorgasbord of choices and requirements’; (iii) ‘Parenthood becoming a project’; (iv) ‘Stretched out life stages’; (v) ‘(Im)possibilities to procreate’; and (vi) ‘Intergenerational pronatalism’. Our findings reflect increasing expectations on what it means to be prepared for parenthood. Despite increasing awareness of the precariousness of romantic relationships, people still wish to build new families but try to be as prepared as possible for adverse events. The findings also show how increasing life expectancy and medical advancements have come to influence people’s views on their reproductive timeline.

Research on reproductive decision-making mainly focuses on women's experiences and desire for children. Men included in this type of research usually represent one-half of a heterosexual couple and/or men who are involuntarily childless. Perspectives from a broader group of men are lacking. This study is based on the results of a baseline questionnaire answered by 191 men aged 20–50 years who attended two sexual health clinics in two major Swedish cities. The questionnaire included questions about sociodemographic background, reproductive history and fertility, but also two open-ended questions focusing on reasons for having or not having children. The results of these two questions were analysed by manifest content analysis and resulted in five categories: ‘(non-)ideal images’, ‘to pass something on’, ‘personal development and self-image’, ‘the relationship with the (potential) co-parent’ and ‘practical circumstances and prerequisites’. Reasons for having children were mainly based on ideal images of children, family and parenthood. Meanwhile, reasons for not having children usually concerned practical issues. The type of answer given was related to men's procreative intentions but not to background characteristics. In conclusion, men raised many different aspects for and against having children. Therefore, reproductive decision-making should not be considered a non-choice among men.