Pregnancy is a significant life event for many. Using mobile apps to manage pregnancies is common. Pregnancy loss is a common complication associated with stigma that impacts one’s wellbeing, relationships, sense of self, and more. While pregnancy loss is important to many experiencing it, it is unclear to what extent pregnancy-related mobile apps account for it and consider associated users’ needs in their designs. We conducted a feature analysis of 166 pregnancy-related apps. We found that their main features focus on information, tracking, reminders, and social contact, and that 72% of these apps do not account for loss, 18% explicitly account for it, and 10% passively do so. We theorize this lack of consideration as symbolic annihilation through design. We argue that such annihilation is partly shaped by intensified mothering ideologies, further stigmatizes pregnancy loss, and perpetuates a normative, linear portrait of the pregnancy experience which is harmful and marginalizing.
AndalibiN (2019) What happens after disclosing stigmatized experiences on identified social media: individual, dyadic, and social/network outcomes. In: Proceedings of the 2019 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, Glasgow, Scotland, 2 May, pp. 1–15. New York: Association for Computing Machinery.
2.
AndalibiN (2020) Disclosure, privacy, and stigma on social media: examining non-disclosure of distressing experiences. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction27(3): 18:1–18:43.
3.
AndalibiNForteA (2018a) Announcing pregnancy loss on Facebook: a decision-making framework for stigmatized disclosures on identified social network sites. In: Proceedings of the 20 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems—CHI’18, Montreal, QC, Canada, April 2018, pp. 1–14. New York: ACM Press.
4.
AndalibiNForteA (2018b) Responding to sensitive disclosures on social media: a decision-making framework. ACM Transactions on Computer-human Interaction (TOCHI)25(6): 31:1–31:29.
5.
AndalibiNGarciaP (2021) Sensemaking and coping after pregnancy loss: the seeking and disruption of emotional validation online. Proceedings of the ACM Human Computer Interaction, CSCW.
6.
AndalibiNMorrisMEForteA (2018) Testing waters, sending clues: indirect disclosures of socially stigmatized experiences on social media. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction2(CSCW): 1–23.
7.
BarberTJBorokTSuchakT, et al. (2019) Having children outside a heterosexual relationship: options for persons living with HIV. Sexually Transmitted Infections95(2): 99–101.
8.
BeckerG (1994) Metaphors in disrupted lives: infertility and cultural constructions of continuity. Medical Anthropology Quarterly8(4): 383–410.
9.
BenedictisSDJohnsonCRobertsJ, et al. (2019) Quantitative insights into televised birth: a content analysis of One Born Every Minute. Critical Studies in Media Communication36(1): 1–17.
10.
BradyEGuerinS (2010) “not the romantic, all happy, coochy coo experience”: a qualitative analysis of interactions on an Irish parenting web site. Family Relations59(1): 14–27.
11.
ButlerJ (1993) Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of “Sex.” Psychology Press. Routledge.
12.
CaldeiraCChenYChanL, et al. (2018) Mobile apps for mood tracking: an analysis of features and user reviews. AMIA Annual Symposium Proceedings2017: 495–504.
13.
CampbellA (1999) Childfree and Sterilized: Women’s Decisions and Medical Responses. London and New York: Cassell.
14.
CaswellM (2016) Seeing Yourself in History: Community Archives in the Fight Against Symbolic Annihilation. The Public Historian36(4): 26–37.
15.
ColemanRRMYochimEC (2008) Symbolic annihilation. In: DonsbachW (ed.) The International Encyclopedia of Communication. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, pp. 4922–4924.
16.
DasR (2017) Speaking about birth: visible and silenced narratives in online discussions of childbirth. Social Media + Society3(4): 2056305117735753.
17.
DasR (2019) The mediation of childbirth: “joyful” birthing and strategies of silencing on a Facebook discussion group. European Journal of Cultural Studies22: 495–510.
18.
DeclercqERSakalaCCorryMP, et al. (2014) Major survey findings of listening to mothers(SM) III: pregnancy and birth: report of the third national U.S. survey of women’s childbearing experiences. The Journal of Perinatal Education23(1): 9–16.
EpsteinDALeeNBKangJH, et al. (2017) Examining menstrual tracking to inform the design of personal informatics tools. Proceedings of the 20 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems—CHI’172017: 6876–6888.
FoucaultM (1990) The History of Sexuality, Vol. 1: an Introduction. Reissue ed. New York: Vintage.
23.
GellerPA (2012) The role of emerging technology in women’s response to pregnancy loss. Expert Review of Obstetrics & Gynecology7(1): 19–23.
24.
GerbnerGGrossL (1976) Living with television: the violence profile. Journal of Communication26(2): 172–194.
25.
GogginG (2011) Ubiquitous apps: politics of openness in global mobile cultures. Digital Creativity22(3): 148–159.
26.
HardenAOgdenJ (1999) Young women’s experiences of arranging and having abortions. Sociology of Health & Illness21(4): 426–444.
27.
HaysS (1998) The Cultural Contradictions of Motherhood. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
28.
HearnLMillerMFletcherA (2013) Online healthy lifestyle support in the perinatal period: what do women want and do they use it?Australian Journal of Primary Health19(4): 313–318.
29.
HughsonJ-APDalyJOWoodward-KronR, et al. (2018) The rise of pregnancy apps and the implications for culturally and linguistically diverse women: narrative review. JMIR Mhealth and Uhealth6(11): e189.
30.
HuntemannN (2015) No more excuses: using twitter to challenge the symbolic annihilation of women in games. Feminist Media Studies15(1): 164–167.
31.
JohnsonSA (2014) “Maternal devices,” social media and the self-management of pregnancy, mothering and child health. Societies4(2): 330–350.
32.
KerstingAKrokerKSchlichtS, et al. (2011) Internet-based treatment after pregnancy loss: concept and case study. Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics & Gynecology32(2): 72–78.
33.
KraschnewskiJLChuangCHPooleES, et al. (2014) Paging “Dr. Google”: does technology fill the gap created by the prenatal care visit structure? Qualitative focus group study with pregnant women. Journal of Medical Internet Research16(6): e147.
34.
LayneLL (1997) Breaking the silence: an agenda for a feminist discourse of pregnancy loss. Feminist Studies23(2): 289–315.
35.
LayneLL (2002) Motherhood Lost: A Feminist Account of Pregnancy Loss in America. New York: Routledge.
36.
LayneLL (2003) Unhappy endings: a feminist reappraisal of the women’s health movement from the vantage of pregnancy loss. Social Science & Medicine56(9): 1881–1891.
37.
LeeEJ (2008) Living with risk in the age of “intensive motherhood”: maternal identity and infant feeding. Health, Risk & Society10(5): 467–477.
38.
LetherbyG (2002a) Challenging dominant discourses: identity and change and the experience of “infertility” and “involuntary childlessness.”Journal of Gender Studies11(3): 277–288.
39.
LetherbyG (2002b) Childless and bereft? Stereotypes and realities in relation to “voluntary” and “involuntary” childlessness and womanhood. Sociological Inquiry72(1): 7–20.
40.
LittlerJ (2013) The rise of the “yummy mummy”: popular conservatism and the neoliberal maternal in contemporary British Culture. Communication, Culture & Critique6(2): 227–243.
LuptonD (2013) Introduction. In: LuptonD (ed.) The Social Worlds of the Unborn. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 1–11.
43.
LuptonD (2014) Apps as artefacts: towards a critical perspective on mobile health and medical apps. Societies4(4): 606–622.
44.
LuptonD (2015) Quantified sex: a critical analysis of sexual and reproductive self-tracking using apps. Culture, Health & Sexuality17(4): 440–453.
45.
LuptonDPedersenS (2016) An Australian survey of women’s use of pregnancy and parenting apps. Women and Birth: Journal of the Australian College of Midwives29(4): 368–375.
MackenzieA (2016) The performativity of code: software and cultures of circulation—Adrian Mackenzie, 2005. Theory, Culture & Society22: 71–92.
48.
MadgeCO’ConnorH (2006) Parenting gone wired: empowerment of new mothers on the internet?Social & Cultural Geography7(2): 199–220.
49.
MerskinD (1998) Sending up signals: a survey of native american1 media use and representation in the mass media. Howard Journal of Communications9(4): 333–345.
50.
MirSPaschynC (2018) Qatar’s hidden women: symbolic annihilation and documentary media practice. Visual Communication Quarterly25(2): 93–105.
51.
NeitermanE (2012) Doing pregnancy: pregnant embodiment as performance. Women’s Studies International Forum35(5): 372–383.
52.
NeugebauerRRitsherJ (2005) Depression and grief following early pregnancy loss. International Journal of Childbirth Education20(3): 21–24.
53.
NeyerGBernardiL (2011) Feminist perspectives on motherhood and reproduction. Historical Social Research36: 162–176.
54.
OakleyA (1984) The Captured Womb: A History of the Medical Care of Pregnant Women. Oxford: B. Blackwell.
55.
PaikHComstockG (1994) The effects of television violence on antisocial behavior: a meta-analysis. Communication Research21(4): 516–546.
56.
PetersonHEngwallK (2013) Silent bodies: childfree women’s gendered and embodied experiences. European Journal of Women’s Studies20(4): 376–389.
57.
PeytonT (2014) Pregnancy ecologies as teachable moments for the lifecourse: changing the mHealth design paradigm. In: Proceedings of the 18th international conference on supporting group work, Sanibel Island, FL, 9 November, pp. 269–271. New York: Association for Computing Machinery.
58.
PeytonTWisniewskiP (2020) Improving a design space: pregnancy as a collaborative information and social support ecology. In: AraiKBhatiaR (eds) Advances in Information and Communication. Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 505–525.
59.
PeytonTPooleEReddyM, et al. (2014) “Every pregnancy is different”: designing mHealth for the pregnancy ecology. In: Proceedings of the 2014 conference on designing interactive systems, New York, NY, June 2014, pp. 577–586. New York: ACM.
60.
PrabhakarAGuerra-ReyesLEffronA, et al. (2017) “Let me know if you need anything”: support realities of new mothers. In: Pervasive Health, Proceedings of the 11th EAI International Conference on Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare, Barcelona, Spain, May 2017, pp. 31–40. ACM.
61.
RichEMiahA (2014) Understanding digital health as public pedagogy: a critical framework. Societies4(2): 296–315.
62.
RodgerDSkuseAWilmoreM, et al. (2013) Pregnant women’s use of information and communications technologies to access pregnancy-related health information in South Australia. Australian Journal of Primary Health19(4): 308–312.
63.
SavitzDAHertz-PicciottoIPooleC, et al. (2002) Epidemiologic measures of the course and outcome of pregnancy. Epidemiologic Reviews24(2): 91–101.
64.
SchulerDNamiokaA (1993) Participatory Design: Principles and Practices. CRC Press.
65.
ScottKMGomeGARichardsD, et al. (2015) How trustworthy are apps for maternal and child health?Health and Technology4(4): 329–336.
66.
SelimovicJM (2020) Gendered silences in post-conflict societies: a typology. Peacebuilding8(1): 1–15.
67.
SilvermanREBagliaJ (2015) Communicating Pregnancy Loss: Narrative as a Method for Change. New York: Peter Lang.
68.
StraussACorbinJ (1998) Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. 2nd ed.Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
69.
ThomasGMLuptonD (2016) Threats and thrills: pregnancy apps, risk and consumption. Health, Risk & Society17(7–8): 495–509.
70.
TrippNHaineyKLiuA, et al. (2014) An emerging model of maternity care: smartphone, midwife, doctor?Women and Birth: Journal of the Australian College of Midwives27(1): 64–67.
71.
TuchmanG (1979) Women’s depiction by the mass media. The University of Chicago Press Journals4(3): 528–542.
72.
TuchmanG (2000) The symbolic annihilation of women by the mass media. In: CrothersLLockhartC (eds) Culture and Politics: A Reader. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 150–174.
73.
TylerIClementsJ (2009) The taboo aesthetics of the birth scene. Feminist Review93(1): 134–137.
74.
UptonRL (2001) “Infertility Makes You Invisible”: gender, Health and the Negotiation of Fertility in Northern Botswana. Journal of Southern African Studies27(2): 349–362. DOI: 10.1080/03057070120050019
75.
VenzoPHessK (2013) “Honk against homophobia”: rethinking relations between media and sexual minorities. Journal of Homosexuality60(11): 1539–1556.
76.
WinnerL (1980) Do artifacts have politics?Daedalus109(1): 121–136.
