Search

How do relationships shape requests for financial assistance? I conducted a qualitative content analysis of 1666 US-based GoFundMe campaigns for patients with colorectal cancer. I identify three types of campaign organizers—self-funders, financially bonded campaigners and financially independent campaigners—who draw on different narratives of deservingness depending on their relationship to medical costs. I find that organizers use stories to create good matches, which vary depending on the organizer's financial relationship with the patient. Financially independent campaigners, who do not experience the burden of medical bills, tell stories that counter dominant cultural beliefs about dependency. Self-funders and financially bonded campaigners both told stories that managed the stigma of dependency, where the former connects self-sufficiency to employment and the latter argues that medical prices make it impossible to prepare. These findings provide novel insights into theories of relational work and how financial relationships shape narratives of debt, dependency and deservingness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines how gender beliefs are embedded in the organizational practices of the reproductive market. Third party reproduction blurs boundaries between familial and non-familial members, making gamete banks and donation agencies important sites for studying the construction of family. Cultural beliefs about gender are implicated in the discourses and practices of these organizations, which shape and constrain the experiences and options for both gamete donors and recipient families. To evaluate this process, I conducted qualitative analyses on the recruitment materials of all of sperm banks, egg banks, and egg donation agencies in the United States. My analysis demonstrates that the reproductive market still relies on heteronormative assumptions of family. However, the extent to which these organizations facilitate participation in new, non-normative family forms breaks down along gendered lines, where sperm donors have more freedom, status, and potential to create relationships with recipient families than egg donors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, we examine discourse in public deliberations in pre-development locales in the UK and US about advantages and disadvantages of future shale development ('fracking'). We aimed to understand how people anticipate potential health effects, broadly construed, of environmental toxicity and disturbance in the context of planned, but not yet implemented, energy development. In day-long deliberations with small, diverse groups in two cities in each country (London, Cardiff in the UK; Los Angeles, Santa Barbara in the US), participants discussed impacts on health and well-being using three main rubrics: 'It's money or health', 'Why take chances?' and 'Beyond the tipping point'. Throughout, participants framed health as an intrinsically moral issue, with collective responsibility as a dominant normative frame. We identify the concept of compound risk to underscore effects of multiple risks and hazards on people's sensibilities about anticipated future health and environmental harm. The findings demonstrate how and why diverse publics in pre-impact sites in both countries saw shale extraction as high stakes development that poses significant, often unacceptable, risks to human and environmental health and well-being. Risks extended beyond toxicity to broad threats to health, including, for some, the end of life as we know it on the planet. Overall, participants' discussions of health were more connected to social categories and their underlying moral principles than to technological details. This work contributes evidence of blurred boundaries between environment and health as well as the importance people place on social risks in the context of proposed energy system change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: This review explores the framing of men and infertility in recent interdisciplinary social science research. I illustrate how men's diverse institutional roles surrounding medicalized experiences of infertility are critical for understanding inequality in reproduction. Situating research on men and infertility in the theoretical framework of gender as social structure shows how men's secondary position in reproduction can be seen across institutional roles, which include men as patients, men as partners, men as sperm donors, and men as doctors. Men's experiences with reproductive medicine often reinforce men's marginal position in reproductive medicine through institutionalized arrangements; yet, men are intimately and structurally involved in reproductive decisions. I argue that bringing gender to the center of research on infertility could make clear the many structural ways women and women's bodies are controlled, regulated, and treated by reproductive medicine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Drawing on insights from a yearlong ethnography and in-depth survey of the members of a Buddhist monastery located in the heart of modern Europe, we examine how members of the organization come to be more or less involved in the organization and in its core institutional logic. Here we present an exploratory analysis of how individuals' beliefs about Buddhism and its relationship to everyday life are deeply intertwined with and articulated into different regimes of organizational activities, rituals, and religious practices. Borrowing from institutional logics theory, we use methods for illustrating the relational structure that articulates dualities linking beliefs and practices together. We show that dually ordered assemblages can reveal different types of logics embraced by different members of an organization. Our principal contention is that the greater the structural alignment between an individual's belief structure, their repertoire of practices, and the institutional logic of the organization, the more well integrated that individual will likely be within the organization, the higher the probability of transformational changes of personal identity, as well as the greater probability of overall success in organizational membership recruitment and retention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Men and women increasingly express egalitarian preferences for organizing family life, but workplace norms and practices are still based on relatively traditional assumptions about the gender division of labor in families. In this article, we unpack this discordant feature of the cultural landscape with recent sociological research on gender, work, and family. We begin by discussing the growing body of evidence on preferences for gender–egalitarian relationships and specify how these egalitarian desires are incongruous with workplace norms and practices. Such a mismatch between desires and reality tends to produce negative personal and career outcomes, including work–family conflict, stress, and job and marital dissatisfaction. Then, we offer a critical review of the recent actions taken by some employers and policymakers to address this issue. We observe some progressive changes in both the public and private sector in regard to family leave policies, flexible work arrangements, childcare support, and fertility benefits, but these policy initiatives still fall short of supporting gender–egalitarian arrangements for working families. We conclude with a discussion of how researchers could better evaluate and increase the effectiveness of workplace initiatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]