Social Support and Women’s Reproductive Decision Making: Testing Emergent Fit of “Optimizing Support for the Preservation of Self”

Abstract

Despite the strong association between social support and positive health outcomes, little is understood about its role in women’s reproductive decision making. Developing insight into how women perceive, mobilize, and experience social support is critical to understanding their lived experiences of reproductive decision making and to implementing appropriate supporting structures to help women realize their reproductive choices. In this study, emergent fit with existing inductive research on the phenomenon of reproductive support is discussed. The existing theory of “optimizing social support for the preservation of self” and its underpinning categorical framework is maintained, but the extant categorical themes were all nuanced, refined, replaced, or removed to better reflect the support phenomenon among a wider cohort of women. This article builds on the existing knowledge base by producing a substantive theory of “optimizing social support for the preservation of self” with wider applicability.

Keywords

decision making health behavior lived experience reproduction social support women’s health qualitative emergent fit analysis Australia

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Allen

Inder

K. J.

Lewin

T. J.

Attia

Kelly

B. J.

(2012). Social support and age influence distress outcomes differentially across urban, regional and remote Australia: An exploratory study. BMC Public Health, 12(1), Article 928. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-12-928

Archer

M. S.

(1995). Realist social theory: The morphogenetic approach. Cambridge University Press.

Arendell

(2000). Conceiving and investigating motherhood: The decade’s scholarship. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62, 1192–1207. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.01192.x

Baheiraei

Mirghafourvand

Mohammadi

Charandabi

M.-A.

Nedjat

(2012). Social support for women of reproductive age and its predictors: A population-based study. BMC Women’s Health, 12, 30–36. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6874-12-30

Bernardi

(2003). Channels of social influence on reproduction. Population Research and Policy Review, 22(5), 427–555. https://doi.org/10.1023/b:Popu.0000020892.15221.44

Bertotti

A. M.

(2013). Gendered divisions of fertility work: Socioeconomic predictors of female versus male sterilization. Journal of Marriage and Family, 75, 13–25. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2012.01031.x

Birditt

K. S.

Newton

N. J.

(2017). Social support and aging, theories of. In Pachana

N. A.

(Ed.), Encyclopedia of geropsychology (pp. 2216–2222). Springer.

Blieszner

Roberto

(2004). Friendship across the life span: Reciprosity in individual relationship development. In Lang

Fingerman

Fitzpatrick

(Eds.), Growing together: Personal relationships across the life span (pp. 159–182). Cambridge University Press.

Charmaz

(2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Sage.

10.

Charmaz

(2008). Chapter 20: Constructionism and the grounded theory. In Holstein

J. A.

Gubrium

J. F.

(Eds.), Handbook of constructionist research (pp. 397–412). Guilford Press.

11.

Choudhury

S. M.

Erausquin

J. T.

Park

Anglade

(2015). Social support and sexual risk among establishment-based female sex workers in Tijuana. Qualitative Health Research, 25(8), 1056–1068. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315587282

12.

Clarke

(2018). Social support and reproductive decision-making: A grounded theory study of the lived experiences of women residing in the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) (Master’s thesis, Deakin University, Burwood, Victoria, Australia). http://chase-deakin.org.au/wp-content/uploads/sites/51/2019/12/S_Clarke_2018.pdf

13.

Daar

Mutcherson

(2015). Intersections in reproduction: Perspectives on abortion and assisted reproductive technologies. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics, 43(2), 174–178. https://doi.org/10.1111/jlme.12230

14.

Emma. (2018). The mental load: A feminist comic. Murdoch Books.

15.

Feeney

B. C.

Collins

N. L.

(2014). A new look at social support: A theoretical perspective on thriving through relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 19(2), 113–147. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868314544222

16.

Fennell

J. L.

(2011). Men bring condoms, women take pills: Men’s and women’s roles in contraceptive decision making. Gender and Society, 25(4), 496–521. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243211416113

17.

Fuhrer

Stansfeld

S. A.

(2002). How gender affects patterns of social relations and their impact on health: A comparison of one or multiple sources of support from “close persons.” Social Science & Medicine, 54(5), 811–825. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0277-9536(01)00111-3

18.

Gottlieb

B. H.

(2000). Selecting and planning support interventions. In Cohen

Underwood

L. G.

Gottlieb

B. H.

(Eds.), Social support measurement and intervention (pp. 195–220). Oxford University Press.

19.

Graham

(2016). “I am a mother”: Young women’s negotiation of femininity and risk in the transition to adulthood. Culture, Health & Sexuality, 18(3), 265–279. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691058.2015.1084376

20.

Haines

Beggs

Hurlbert

(2008). Contextualizing health outcomes: Do effects of network structure differ for women and men? Sex Roles, 59, 164–175. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-008-9441-3

21.

Heaney

Israel

(2008). Social networks and social support. In Glanz

Rimer

Viswanath

(Eds.), Health behaviour and health education: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 189–210). Jossey-Bass.

22.

Jørgensen

Phillips

(2002). Discourse analysis as theory and method. Sage.

23.

Jackson

(2006). Relationships between perceived close social support and health practices within community samples of American women and men. The Journal of Psychology, 140(3), 229–246. https://doi.org/10.3200/JRLP.140.3.229-246

24.

Jacques

H. A.

Radtke

H. L.

(2012). Constrained by choice: Young women negotiate the discourses of marriage and motherhood. Feminism & Psychology, 22(4), 443–461. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959353512442929

25.

Johnson

Widyanti

(2011). Cultural influences on the measurement of subjective mental workload. Ergonomics, 54(6), 509–518. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2011.570459

26.

Langford

Bowsher

Maloney

Lillis

(1997). Social support: A conceptual analysis. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 25(1), 95–100. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.1997.1997025095.x

27.

Meyers

D. T.

(2001). The rush to motherhood—Pronatalist discourse and women’s autonomy. Signs, 26(3), 735–773. http://signsjournal.org/

28.

Ngu

Hay

Menahem

(2015). Why babies—What Australian mothers say. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 35(6), 591–594. https://doi.org/10.3109/01443615.2014.991282

29.

Price

Hawkins

(2007). A conceptual framework for the social analysis of reproductive health. Journal of Health, Population and Nutrition, 25(1), 24–36. https://jhpn.biomedcentral.com/

30.

Redshaw

Martin

C. R.

(2011). Reproductive decision-making, prenatal attachment and early parenting. Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology, 29(3), 195–196. https://doi.org/10.1080/02646838.2011.614106

31.

Reevy

G. M.

Maslach

(2001). Use of social support: Gender and personality differences. Sex Roles, 44(7/8), 437–459. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011930128829

32.

Rich

Taket

Graham

Shelley

(2011). “Unnatural,” “unwomanly,” “uncreditable” and “undervalued”: The significance of being a childless woman in Australian society. Gender Issues, 28(4), 226–247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12147-011-9108-1

33.

Ruhl

(2002). Dilemmas of the will: Uncertainty, reproduction, and the rhetoric of control. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 27(3), 641–663. https://doi.org/10.1086/337940

34.

Slauson-Blevins

Johnson

K. M.

(2016). Doing gender, doing surveys? Women’s gatekeeping and men’s non-participation in multi-actor reproductive surveys. Sociological Inquiry, 86(3), 427–449. https://doi.org/10.1111/soin.12122

35.

Smissen

Lamaro Haintz

McKenzie

Graham

(2020). Discursive representations of social support for reproductive decision-making among Victorian women. Sexuality and Culture, 24, 883–902. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12119-019-09670-y

36.

Snyder

Stukas

A. A.

Jr. (1999). Interpersonal processes: The interplay of cognitive, motivational, and behavioral activities in social interaction. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 273–303. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.50.1.273

37.

Szell

Thurner

(2013). How women organize social networks different from men. Scientific Reports, 3, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep01214

38.

Terry

Braun

(2012). Sticking my finger up at evolution: Unconventionality, selfishness and choice in the talk of men who have had preemptive vasectomies. Men and Masculinities, 15, 207–229. https://doi.org/10.1177/1097184X11430126

39.

Turnball

Graham

M. L.

Taket

A. R.

(2016). Social exclusion of Australian childless women in their reproductive years. Social Inclusion, 4(1), 102–115. https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v4i1.489

40.

Urquhart

(2013). Grounded theory for qualitative research: A practical guide. Sage.

41.

Vann-Ward

Morse

J. M.

Charmaz

(2017). Preserving self: Theorizing the social and psychological processes of living with Parkinson disease. Qualitative Health Research, 27(7), 964–982. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732317707494

42.

Wigginton

Harris

M. L.

Loxton

Herbert

Lucke

(2015). The feminismation of contraceptive use: Australian women’s accounts of accessing contraception. Feminism & Psychology, 25(2), 178–198. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959353514562802

43.

Wigginton

Moran

Harris

M. L.

Loxton

Lucke

(2016). Young Australian women explain their contraceptive choices. Culture, Health & Sexuality, 18(7), 727–741. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691058.2015.1117138

44.

Wuest

(2000). Negotiation with helping systems: An example of grounded theory evolving through emergent fit. Qualitative Health Research, 10(1), 51–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/104973200129118246

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.16 MB