Journal of Reproduction & Infertility

Journal of Reproduction & Infertility

Failure in Identity Building as the Main Challenge of Infertility: A Qualitative Study

Authors
Shaghayegh Alamin 1
Tallat Allahyari 1
Behzad Ghorbani 2
Ali Sadeghitabar 3
Mohammad Taghi Karami 4
1 Department of social work, Faculty of Social Sciences, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran
2 Nanobiotechnology Research Center, Avicenna Research Institute, ACECR, Tehran, Iran; Avicenna Infertility Clinic, Avicenna Research Institute, ACECR, Tehran, Iran
3 Avicenna Infertility Clinic, Avicenna Research Institute, ACECR, Tehran, Iran; Monoclonal Antibody Research Center, Avicenna Research Institute, ACECR, Tehran, Iran
4 Department of Women's Studies, Faculty of Social Sciences, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran
Abstract
Background: The approach of considering the psychosocial consequences of infertility has become significant. Psychosocial outcomes of infertility are defined and shaped in the context of the particular social and cultural conditions. Childbearing, and raising a child are considered to be the core of "identity" in many collectivist cultures, and the status provided to individuals with children is accompanied with social acceptance and approval. In such societies, infertile people see their social identity seriously damaged. The purpose of this study was to comprehend the challenge of identity crisis of infertile people in Iran for helping to formulate support programs for policy makers. Methods: This qualitative study was conducted in 2016-2018, through semi-structured interviews conducted with 40 infertile clients of Avicenna Fertility Center. Data were analyzed by Strauss and Corbin coding paradigm. Results: The core of the phenomenon of psychosocial consequences of infertility was failure in identity building, which included the main categories of prevention from continuity and prevention of forming normative identity. Conclusion: Challenge of identity crisis based on the experience of infertile people and the social construction of infertility in their minds affects not only internal, external, personal and structural factors, but it is also a kind of identity search in individuals. Regarding this fact, providing appropriate social services and training the skills needed to rebuild identity of infertile people and their social health will be very effective.
Keywords
Blood connection
counseling
culture
femininity
identity
Infertility
Masculinity
social context
  1. Berek JS. Berek & Novak’s gynecology. 14th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2007. 1695 p.
  2. Vayena E, Rowe PJ, Griffin PD. Current practices and controversies in assisted reproduction: report of a meeting on medical, ethical and social aspects of assisted reproduction, held at WHO Headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland. World Health Organization; 2002. 404 p.
  3. Matsubayashi H, Hosaka T, Izumi S, Suzuki T, Ma-kino T. Emotional distress of infertile women in Japan. Hum Reprod. 2001;16(5):966-9.
  4. Fido A, Zahid MA. Coping with infertility among Kuwaiti woman: cultural perspectives. Int J Soc Psychiatry. 2004;50(4):294-300.
  5. van Rooji FB, Van Balen F, Hermanns JM. Emotional distress and infertility: Turkish migrant couples compared to Dutch couples in western Turkey. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2007;28(2):87-95.
  6. Becker G, Becker G. The elusive embryo: how women and men approach new reproductive techno-logies. 1st ed. California: University of California Press; 2000. 330 p.
  7. Clarke LH, Martin-Matthews AN, Matthews R. The continuity and discontinuity of the embodied self in infertility. Can Rev Sociol. 2006;43(1):95-113.
  8. Earl S, Letherby G. Conceiving time? women who do or do not conceive. Sociol Health Illn. 2007;29 (2):233-50.
  9. Johanson M, Berg M. Women’s experience of childlessness: 2 years after the end of in vitro fertilization treatment. Scand J Caring Sci. 2005;19(1):58-63.
  10. Redshaw M, Hockley C, Davidson LL. A qualitative study of the experience of treatment for infertility among women who successfully became pre-gnant. Hum Reprod. 2007;22(1):295-304.
  11. Mumtaz Z, Shahid U, Levay A. Understanding the impact of gendered roles on the experience of infertility amongst men and women in Punjab. Reprod Health. 2013;10:3.
  12. Greil AL. Not yet pregnant: infertile couples in contemporary America. 1st ed. US: New Brunswick N.J., University Press; 1991. 243 p.
  13. Pashigian MJ. Conceiving the happy family: infertility and marital politics in northern Vietnam. In: Inhorn MC, Balen FV, editors. Infertility around the globe: new thinking on childlessness, gender and reproductive technologies. California: University of California Press; 2002. p. 134-51.
  14. Greil AL. Infertile bodies: medicalization, metaphor, and agency. In: Inhorn MC, Balen FV, editors. Infertility around the globe: new thinking on childlessness, gender and reproductive technologies. California: University of California Press; 2002. p. 101-18.
  15. Barden-O’Fallon J. Associates of self-reported fertility status and infertility treatment seeking in a rural district of Malawi. Hum Reprod. 2005;20(8):2229-36.
  16. Greil AL. Not yet pregnant: infertile couples in contemporary America. 1st ed. New Brunswick NJ: Rugers University Press; 1991. 51 p.
  17. Ahuja M. Counseling in infertility: south asian federation of obstetrics and gynecology. J SAFOG. 2009;1(2):38-43.
  18. Gibsin DM. The relationship of infertility and death: Using the relational/cultural model of counseling in making meaning. Humanist Psychol. 2007; 35:275-89.
  19. Inhorn MC. Sexuality, masculinity and infertility in Egypt: potent troubles in the marital and medical encounter. J Mens Stud. 2008;10(3):343-59.
  20. Bos H, Van Balen F, Visser A. Social and cultural factors in infertility and chillessness. Patient Educ Couns. 2005;59(3):223-5.
  21. Spannagel C, Glaser-Zikuda M, Shroeder U. Application of qualitative content analysis in user pro-gram interaction research. Forum Qual Soc Res. 2005;6(2).
  22. Corbin J, Strauss A. Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. 2nd ed.Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc; 2008. 358 p.
  23. Polit DF, Beck CT. Essentials of nursing research: methods, appraisal and utilization. 6th ed. Phliade- lphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2006. 554 p.
  24. Lampman C, Dowling-Guyer S. Attitudes toward voluntary and involuntary childlessness. Basic Appl Soc Psych. 1995;17:213-22.
  25. Al-e-Ahmad J. A stone on a grave. 1st ed. CA: Mazda Publishers; 2008. 122 p.
  26. Harris D.L; Daniluk JC. The experience of spontaneous pregnancy loss for infertile women who have conceived through assisted reproduction tech-nology. Hum Reprod. 2010;25(3):714-20.
  27. Haghighatian M, Haghighat F, Rostami Z. Social consequences of infertility on families in the city of Isfahan. Int J Arts Humanit. 2014;10(2):355-61.
  28. Anderson KM, Sharpe M, Ratlary A, Irvine DS. Distress and concernes in couples referred to a spe-cialist infertility clinic. J Psychosom Res. 2003;54 (4):353-5.
  29. Holter H, Anderheim L, Bergh C, Moller A. First IVF treatment- Short-term impact on Psychological well-being and the marital relationship. Hum Reprod. 2006;21(12):3295-302.
  30. Slade P, O'Neill C, Simpson AJ, Lashen H. The re-lationship between perceived stigma, disclosure patterns, support and distress in new attendees at an infertility clinic. Hum Reprod. 2007;22(8):2309-17.
Journal of Reproduction & Infertility
Volume 21, Issue 1
Winter 2020
Pages 49-58