This article experiments with the dialogic epistolary form as a non-traditional representation of ethnographic research on the topic of breastmilk donation. The epistolary genre was chosen because its structure, purpose, and history embodies the key findings of this research, for example, the gulf between milk donors and recipients and the curiosity held by each for the other. The article argues that the dialogic epistolary form provides a more engaging, expansive, and expressive account of the researcher’s role in the ethnographic research process than that offered by traditional academic genres. The article presents research findings in the epistolary form, which provides an accessible and novel presentation of research by inviting readers to occupy the position of both the milk donor and the donor milk recipient. The letters can be used as a resource by health professionals and communities involved in human milk donation or the use of donor milk. The letters are accompanied by an exegesis which offers ethnographers an account of the epistolary genre as a non-traditional form of research representation.
ArnoldL.Lockhardt BormanL. (1996). What are the characteristics of the ideal human milk donor. Journal of Human Lactation, 12, 143-145.
2.
AzemaE.CallahanS. (2003). Breast milk donors in France: A Portrait of the typical donor and the utility of milk banking in the French breastfeeding context. Journal of Human Lactation, 19, 199-202.
3.
BanksS. (2000). Five holiday letters: A fiction. Qualitative Inquiry, 6, 392-405.
4.
BarterN.TregidgaH. (2014). Beyond the academic article: Using fiction, art and literary techniques to communicate. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 54, 5-10.
5.
BeharR. (1996). The vulnerable observer. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
6.
BeharR. (2007). Ethnography in a time of blurred genres. Anthropology and Humanism, 32, 145-155.
7.
BishopE.WillisK. (2014). “Hope is that fiery feeling”: Using poetry as data to explore the meanings of hope for young people. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 15(1), Article 9.
8.
BowerA. (2000). Dear-: In search of new (old) forms of critical address. In GilroyA.VerhoevenW. (Eds.), Epistolary histories (pp. 155-175). Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia.
9.
BoyerK. (2010). Of care and commodities: Breast milk and the new mobile biostructures. Progress in Human Geography, 34, 5-20.
10.
CarrollK. (2014). Body dirt or liquid gold? How the “safety” of donated breast milk is constructed for use in neonatal intensive care. Social Studies of Science, 44, 466-485. doi:10.1177/0306312714521705
11.
CarrollK. (2015). Breast milk donation as care work. In CassidyT.El-TomA. (Eds.), Ethnographies of breastfeeding: Cultural contexts and confrontations (pp. 173-186). London, England: Bloomsbury.
12.
CarrollK.HerrmannK. (2012). Introducing donor human milk to the NICU: Lessons for Australia. Breastfeeding Review, 20(3), 19-26.
13.
CarrollK.HerrmannK. (2013). The cost of using donor human milk in the NICU to achieve exclusively human milk feeding through 32 weeks postmenstrual age. Breastfeeding Medicine, 8, 286-290. doi:10.1089/bfm.2012.0068
14.
ChawanskyM. (2010). Letters to a young baller: Exploring epistolary criticism. Qualitative Inquiry, 16, 721-727.
15.
Clegg SmithK.McLeodK.WakefieldM. (2005). Australian letters to the editor on tobacco: Triggers, rhetoric, and claims of legitimate voice. Qualitative Health Research, 15, 1180-1198.
16.
DolanB.GorenN.PerlisC. (2009). Epistolary medicine. The Lancet, 374, 1588-1589.
17.
Gernstein PineauM. (2013). Giving milk, buying milk: The influence of mothering ideologies and social class in donor milk banking. In CassidyT (Ed.), Breastfeeding (pp. 61-76). New York, NY: Nova Science Publishers.
18.
GilroyA.VerhoevenW. (2000). Introduction. In GilroyA.VerhoevenW. (Eds.), Epistolary histories (pp. 1-28). Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia.
19.
HanischC. (1970). The personal is political. In FirestoneS.KoedtA. (Eds.), Notes from the second year: Women’s liberation (pp. 76-77). New York, NY: Radical Feminism.
20.
HarrisH.WeberM. (2005). Human milk banking: Neonatologists’ opinions and practices. Pediatric Research, 54, 821.
21.
Horton UpdegroveK. (2013). Donor human milk banking: Growth, challenges, and the role of HMBANA. Breastfeeding Medicine, 8, 435-437.
22.
IedemaR.CarrollK. (2015). Research as affect-sphere: Towards spherogenics. Emotion Review, 7, 67-72.
23.
JohnsonS.LeemingD.LyttleS.WilliamsonI. (2012). Empowerment or regulation? Women’s perspectives on expressing milk. In SmithP. H.HausmanB.LabbokM. (Eds.), Beyond health, beyond choice (pp. 180-189). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
24.
KitchS. (1997). “What is the matter that you don’t write”: Letters as interdisciplinary texts. In AndersonM.FineL.GeisslerK.LadensonJ. (Eds.), Doing feminism (pp. 103-118). East Lansing: Michigan State University Press.
25.
KvaleS.BrinkmannS. (2009). InterViews (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
LawJ. (2004). After method. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
28.
MaherJ. (2005). A mother by trade: Australian women reflecting mothering as activity, not identity. Australian Feminist Studies, 20, 17-29.
29.
MannayD. (2013). “I like rough pubs”: Exploring places of safety and danger in violent and abusive relationships. Families, Relationships and Societies, 2, 131-137.
30.
NarayanK. (2007). Tools to shape texts: What creative nonfiction can offer ethnography. Anthropology and Humanism, 32, 130-144.
31.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. (2010). Donor milk banks’ the operation of donor milk bank services. London, England: Author.
32.
RichardsonL. (2000). Writing: A method of inquiry. In DenzinN.LincolnY. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 923-948). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
33.
SharmanR. (2007). Style matters: Ethnography as method and genre. Anthropology and Humanism, 32, 117-129.
34.
ShawI.Clegg SmithK.MiddletonH.WoodwardL. (2005). Letter of consequence: Referral letters from general practitioners to secondary mental health services. Qualitative Health Research, 15, 116-128.
35.
ShawR. (2007). Cross-nursing, ethics, and giving breast milk in the contemporary context. Women’s Studies International Forum, 30, 439-450.
36.
SmithL.KleinmanA. (2010). Emotional engagements: Acknowledgement, advocacy and direct action. In DaviesJ.SpencerD. (Eds.), Emotions in the field (pp. 171-187). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
37.
SmithBattleL.LeanderS.WesthusN.FreedP.McLaughlinD. (2010). Writing therapeutic letters in undergraduate nursing education: Promoting relational skill development. Qualitative Health Research, 20, 707-716.
38.
StanleyL. (2004). The epistolarium: On theorizing letters and correspondences. Auto/Biography, 12, 201-235.
39.
SullivanS.SchanlerR.KimJ.PatelA.TrawoR.Kiechl-KohlendorferU.. . .LucasA. (2010). An exclusively human milk-based diet is associated with a lower rate of necrotizing enterocolitis than a diet of human milk and bovine milk-based products. The Journal of Pediatrics, 156, 562-567.
40.
SwansonK. (2014). Banking on the body. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
41.
SwansonV.NicolH.McInnesR.CheyneH.MactierH.CallanderE. (2012). Developing maternal self-efficacy for feeding preterm babies in the neonatal unit. Qualitative Health Research, 22, 1369-1382.
42.
TamboukouM. (2008). Re-imagining the narratable subject. Qualitative Research, 8, 283-292.
43.
TedlockB. (1991). From participant observation to the observation of participation: The emergence of narrative ethnography. Journal of Anthropological Research, 47(1), 69-94.
44.
TurnerE. (2007). Introduction to the art of ethnography. Anthropology and Humanism, 32, 108-116.
45.
WaldbyC. (2002). Biomedicine, tissue transfer and intercorporeality. Feminist Theory, 3, 239-254.
46.
WhiteA.Wright-SoikaM.RussellM. (2007). Epistolary connections: Letters as pedagogical tools in the introductory women’s studies course. Feminist Teacher, 17, 204-224.
47.
WolfJ. (2011). Is breast best?New York: New York University Press.
48.
ZizzoG. (2013). Perceptions and negotiations of “Failure” in an Australian breast milk bank. In CassidyT (Ed.), Breastfeeding (pp. 77-92). New York, NY: Nova Biomedical.
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.
