This study investigated how women undergoing IVF make sense of themselves in the context of their reproductive experiences. Interviews were conducted with fourteen women aged 27–42. Interpretative Phenomenological analysis was used. Four main themes emerged: Motherhood beyond all, Us and them, Changes in self-perception, My agency. The results are discussed in the context of reproductive identity. It has shown that being a mother is an identity the participants strongly strive for. Participants feel connected to women with whom they share the experience of dealing with infertility and different from those without such an experience. The specificity of their reproductive experience leads to changes in self-perception that can be interpreted as either impairment or growth. On their reproductive journey, they show their agency by undertaking a series of activities (control of thoughts, feelings, and body). Practical implications of the obtained results are discussed.
AbbeyAAndrewsFMHalmanLJ (1991) Gender’s role in responses to infertility. Psychology of Women Quarterly15(2): 295–316.
2.
AlaminSAllahyariTGhorbaniB, et al. (2020) Failure in identity building as the main challenge of infertility: A qualitative study. Journal of Reproduction and Fertility21(1): 49–58.
3.
AthanAM (2020) Reproductive identity: An emerging concept. American Psychologist75(4): 445–456.
4.
Barden-O’FallonJ (2005) Associates of self-reported fertility status and infertility treatment-seeking in a rural district of Malawi. Human Reproduction20(8): 2229–2236.
5.
BellAV (2019) I’m not really 100% a woman if I can’t have a kid”: Infertility and the intersection of gender, identity, and the body. Gender & Society33(4): 629–651.
6.
Ben-ZurH (2009) Coping styles and affect. International Journal of Stress Management16(2): 87–101.
7.
BergerRPaulMHenshawL (2013) Women’s experience of infertility: a multi-systemic perspective. International Journal of Women’s Studies14(1): 54–68.
8.
ChapmanESmithJA (2002) Interpretative phenomenological analysis and the new genetics. Journal of Health Psychology7(2): 125–130.
9.
CunninghamNCunninghamT (2013) Women’s experiences of infertility - towards a relational model of care. Journal of Clinical Nursing22(23-24): 3428–3437.
10.
ÐjorićGGavrilovićD (2006) Between pro-natalist population policy and women’s reproductive rights: The analysis of exposure of the two discourses in press media after 2000. Sociologija48(1): 73–95.
11.
FerlandPCaronSL (2013) Exploring the long-term impact of female infertility: A qualitative analysis of interviews with postmenopausal women who remained childless. Family Journal21(2): 180–188.
12.
FernandesPPapaikonomouMNieuwoudtJM (2006) Women suffering through their bodies. South African Journal of Psychology36(4): 851–879.
13.
FifeBLScottLLFinebergNS, et al. (2008) Promoting adaptive coping by persons with HIV disease: Evaluation of a patient/partner intervention model. Journal of the Association of Nurses in AIDS Care19(1): 75–84.
14.
FrancoJgJrRazera BaruffiRLMauriAL, et al. (2002) Psychological evaluation test for infertile couples. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics19(6): 269–273.
15.
FranklinS (1997) Embodied Progress: A Culture Account of Assisted Conception. London & New York: Routledge.
GreilA (2002) Infertile bodies: Medicalization, metaphor, and agency. In: InhornMCvan BalenF. (ed.) Infertility Around the Globe: New Thinking on Childlessness, Gender, and Reproductive Technologies: A View From the Social Sciences. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, pp.101–118.
18.
GreilALSlauson-BlevinsKMcQuillanJ (2010) The experience of infertility: A review of recent literature. Sociology of Health & Illness32(1): 140–162.
19.
Hasanpoor-AzghadySBSimbarMVedadhirAA, et al. (2019) The social construction of infertility among Iranian infertile women: A qualitative study. Journal of Reproduction and Fertility20(3): 178–190.
20.
HollosM (2003) Profiles of infertility in southern Nigeria: Women’s voices from Amakiri. African Journal of Reproductive Health7(2): 46–56.
21.
JordanCRevensonTA (1999) Gender differences in coping with infertility: A meta-analysis. Journal of Behavioral Medicine22(4): 341–358.
22.
Krickovic-PeleKBekerK (2014) Gender and social controversies of in vitro fertilization in Serbia: Discrimination against childless women. Temida17(3): 49–68.
23.
Krickovic-PeleKZotovic-KosticM (2018) New reproductive technologies in Serbia - who are the women in the national IVF program?Sociologija60(1): 96–111.
24.
LiefbroerACKlobasJEPhilipovD, & et al. (2015) Reproductive decision-making in a macro-micro perspective: A conceptual framework. In: PhilipovDLiefbroerACJ. E. KlobasJE (eds) Reproductive decision-making in a macro-micro perspective. Springer Science + Business Media, pp. 1–15.
25.
McBainTDReevesP (2019) Women’s experience of infertility and disenfranchised grief. Family Journal27(2): 156–166.
26.
McQuillanJGreilALWhiteL, et al. (2003) Frustrated fertility: Infertility and psychological distress among women. Journal of Marriage and Family65(4): 1007–1018.
27.
Mesquita da SilvaSPlaceJMBoivinJ, et al. (2020) Failure after fertility treatment: Regulation strategies when facing a blocked parenthood goal. Human Fertility23(3): 179–185.
28.
MitrovićMKostićJORistićM (2022) Intolerance of uncertainty and distress in women with delayed IVF treatment due to the COVID-19 pandemic: The mediating role of situation appraisal and coping strategies. Journal of Health Psychology27(11): 2515–2528.
29.
NovakovM (2010) Attitude toward infertility and unwed births in Serbian village. Socioloski pregled44(2): 337–348.
30.
PashigianMJ (2002) Conceiving the happy family: Infertility and marital politics in Northern Vietnam. In: InhornMCvan BalenF (eds) Infertility Around the Globe: New Thinking on Childlessness, Gender, and Reproductive Technologies: A View From the Social Sciences. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, pp.134–151.
31.
PhillipsEElanderJMontagueJ (2014) Managing multiple goals during fertility treatment: An interpretative phenomenological analysis. Journal of Health Psychology19(4): 531–543.
32.
RiedKAlfredA (2013) Quality of life, coping strategies and support needs of women seeking traditional Chinese medicine for infertility and viable pregnancy in Australia: A mixed methods approach. BMC Women’s Health13(1): 1–11.
33.
RybińskaA (2021) Trends in intentions to remain childless in the United States. Population Research and Policy Review40(4): 661–672.
SkrobićLPucarevićB (2021) Stigma and in vitro fertilization: Perception of women with IVF experience. FactaUniversitatis, Series: Philosophy, Sociology, Psychology and History20(2): 149–162.
36.
SmithJA (2011) Evaluating the contribution of interpretative phenomenological analysis. Health Psychology Review5(1): 9–27.
37.
SmithJAOsbornM (2008) Interpretative Phenemenological Analysis. In: SmithJA (ed) Qualitative Psychology: A Practical Guide to Research Methods. London: Sage. pp. 53–80.
38.
TaebiMKarimanNMontazeriA, et al. (2021) Infertility stigma: A qualitative study on feelings and experiences of infertile women. International Journal of Fertility and Sterility15(3): 189–196.
39.
TahaSMathesonKCroninT, et al. (2014) Intolerance of uncertainty, appraisals, coping, and anxiety: The case of the 2009 H1N1 pandemic. British Journal of Health Psychology19(3): 592–605.
40.
ThompsonC (2005) Making Parents: The Ontological Choreography of Reproductive Technologies. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
41.
TodorovaILGKotzevaT (2006) Contextual shifts in Bulgarian women’s identity in the face of infertility. Psychology and Health21(1): 123–141.
42.
VossPSchickMLangerL, et al. (2020) Recurrent pregnancy loss: A shared stressor—couple-orientated psychological research findings. Fertility and Sterility114(6): 1288–1296.
43.
YuCLiWDengM (2021) Hope and anxiety: The study of female embodied experience with assisted reproductive technology. Chinese Journal of Sociology7(2): 138–170.
44.
Zegers-HochschildFAdamsonGDde MouzonJ, et al.; International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technology and World Health Organization (2009) The international committee for monitoring assisted reproductive technology (ICMART) and the world health organization (WHO) revised glossary on ART terminology, 2009. Human Reproduction24(11): 2683–2687.
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.
