Before Louise Brown

social representations of the in vitro embryo in the press

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.35699/1676-1669.2023.37922

Keywords:

test tube baby, social representations, in vitro embryo

Abstract

When a new scientific fact appears in public discussions and political controversies, people are socially called upon to interpret a constantly changing reality. This paper analyzed the social representations that circulated in Folha de São Paulo about the in vitro embryo until 1978, when the first “test tube baby” was born. We found 67 reports published between January 1961 and December 1978 that were analyzed with the help of Alceste software. The results show five classes of words organized in two axes of meanings: Development and scope of manipulation of germinal materials and Impacts of in vitro fertilization on the family. In the emerging context of new reproductive technologies, the in vitro embryo raised axiological questions related to filiation, kinship and the human in the Brazilian public sphere.

Author Biographies

  • Renata Lira dos Santos Aléssio, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco

    Renata Lira dos Santos Aléssio é professora adjunta do Departamento de Psicologia e do Programa de Pós-Graduação em Psicologia da Universidade Federal de Pernambuco.

  • Edclécia Reino Carneiro de Morais, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco

    Edclécia Reino Carneiro de Morais é professora adjunta da Universidade Federal do Vale do São Francisco e professora Colaboradora do Programa de Pós-graduação em Psicologia da Universidade Federal de Pernambuco.

  • Jacqueline de França Neto, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco

    Jacqueline de França Neto é graduada em Psicologia pela Universidade Federal de Pernambuco.

  • Maria de Fátima de Souza Santos, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco

    Maria de Fátima de Souza Santos é professora titular do Departamento de Psicologia da Universidade Federal de Pernambuco.

References

Agacinski, S. (2010). Le corps fabriqué. Le Débat, 159(2), 128–140. https://doi.org/10.3917/deba.159.0128 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3917/deba.159.0128

Arruda, A. (2003). Living is Dangerous: Research Challenges in Social Representations. Culture & Psychology, 9(4), 339–359. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1354067X0394002

Bateman, S., & Salem, T. (1999). L’embryon en suspens. Cahiers du Genre, 25, 49–73. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3406/genre.1999.1089

Bauer, M. (1994). A popularização da ciência como imunização cultural: A função das representações sociais. In S. Jovchelovitch & P. Guareschi (Orgs.), Textos em representações sociais (p. 229–257). Vozes.

Bauer, M. W. (1995). Resistance to new technology ans its effects on nuclear power, information technology and biotechnology. In M. W. Bauer (Org.), Resistance to new technology: Nuclear power, information technology and biotecnology (p. 1–44). Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511563706.002

Bonardi, C. (2006). La “vache folle” à travers les discours: Pensée sociale et structures profondes des représentations sociales. In C. Fraïssé (Org.), Les représentations de la vache folle (p. 57–116). Éd. Zagros.

Carvalho, J. G. da S., & Arruda, A. (2008). The theory of social representations and history: A necessary dialogue. Paidéia (Ribeirão Preto), 18(41), 445–456. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-863X2008000300003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-863X2008000300003

Cesarino, L. D. N. (2007). Nas fronteiras do “humano”: Os debates britânico e brasileiro sobre a pesquisa com embriões. Mana: Estudos de Antropologia Social, 13(2), 347–380. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-93132007000200003

Cesarino, L., & Luna, N. (2011). The embryo research debate in Brazil: From the National Congress to the Federal Supreme Court. Social Studies of Science, 41(2), 227–250. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312710386637 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312710386637

Correa, M. C. D. V. (1997). As novas tecnologias reprodutivas: Uma revolução a ser assimilada. Physis: Revista de Saúde Coletiva, 7(1), 69–98. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-73311997000100004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-73311997000100004

Diniz, D. (2003). Autonomia reprodutiva: Um estudo de caso sobre a surdez. Cadernos de Saúde Pública, 19(1), 175–181. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0102-311X2003000100019

Franklin, S. (1999). What we know and what we don’t about cloning and society. New Genetics & Society, 18(1), 111. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14636779908656893

Harvey, O. (2005). Regulating stem-cell research and human cloning in an Australian context: An exercise in protecting the status of the human subject. New Genetics and Society, 24(2), 125–136. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14636770500184776

Herzlich, C., & Pierret, J. (2005). Uma doença no espaço público: A AIDS em seis jornais franceses. Physis: Revista de Saúde Coletiva, 15, 71–101. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-73312005000300005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-73312005000300005

Jodelet, D. (2003). Représentations sociales, un domaine en expansion. In Les représentations sociales (7e édition., p. 47–78). Presses universitaires de France. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3917/puf.jodel.2003.01.0045

Jovchelovitch, S. (2008). Os contextos do saber representações, comunidade e cultura. Vozes.

Kirejczyk, M. (1999). Parliamentary Cultures and Human Embryos: The Dutch and British Debates Compared. Social Studies of Science, 29(6), 889–912. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/030631299029006004

Lander, E. S., Baylis, F., Zhang, F., Charpentier, E., Berg, P., Bourgain, C., Friedrich, B., Joung, J. K., Li, J., Liu, D., Naldini, L., Nie, J.-B., Qiu, R., Schoene-Seifert, B., Shao, F., Terry, S., Wei, W., & Winnacker, E.-L. (2019). Adopt a moratorium on heritable genome editing. Nature, 567(7747), 165. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-00726-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-00726-5

Le Coz, P. (2010). L’embryon: De la théologie médiévale aux avis du CCNE. Le corps et la loi. Actes du Colloque des 2èmes rencontres internationales sur le corps et l’image, 91–98.

Luna, N. (2001). Pessoa e parentesco nas novas tecnologias reprodutivas. Estudos Feministas, 2, 389–413. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-026X2001000200005

Luna, N. (2002). As novas tecnologias reprodutivas e o estatuto do embrião: Um discurso do magistério da Igreja Católica sobre a natureza. Gênero, 3(1), 83–100. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22409/rg.v3i1.259

Mehl, D. (1998). Bioéthique—Revue de presse. In R. Frydman, M. Flis-Trèves, & B. Koeppel (Orgs.), Les procréations médicalement assistées: Vingt ans après (p. 151–174). Odile Jacob.

Missa, J.-N. (2000). Le statut de l’embryon in vitro: Terminologie et approche philosophique. In Y. Englert & A. van Orshoven (Orgs.), L’embryon humain in vitro (p. 15–28). De Boeck & Larcier.

Moscovici, S. (1976). La psychanalyse, son image et son public. Presses Universitaires de France.

Moscovici, S. (2003). O fenômeno das representações sociais. In Representações sociais: Investigações em psicologia social (p. 29–110). Vozes.

Moscovici, S., & Vignaux, G. (1994). Le concept de thêmata. In C. Guimelli (Org.), Structures et transformations des représentations sociales (p. 25–72). Delachaux & Niestlé.

Mulkay, M. (1993). Rhetorics of hope and fear in the great embryo debate. Social studies of science, 23(4), 721–742. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/030631293023004004

Mulkay, M. (1994a). Changing minds about embryo research. Public Understanding of Science, 3, 195–213. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/3/2/004

Mulkay, M. (1994b). Embryos in the news. Public Understanding of Science, 3, 33–51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/3/1/003

Nascimento, A. R. A. do, & Menandro, P. R. M. (2006). Análise lexical e análise de conteúdo: Uma proposta de utilização conjugada. Estudos e pesquisas em psicologia, 6(2), 72–88.

Picavet, E. (2006). Les pratiques de fécondation in vitro et les limites de l’éthique du consensus. Actes de savoirs - La reproduction, 1, 7–32.

Salem, T. (1997). As novas tecnologias reprodutivas: O estatuto do embrião e a noção de pessoa. Mana: Estudos de Antropologia Social, 3, 75–93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-93131997000100003

Strathern, M. (1992). After nature: English kinship in the late twentieth century. Cambridge University Press.

Svendsen, M. N., & Koch, L. (2008). Unpacking the “Spare Embryo”: Facilitating Stem Cell Research in a Moral Landscape. Social Studies of Science, 38(1), 93–110. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312707082502

Théry, I. (2010). Des humains comme les autres. Bioéthique, anonymat et genre du don. Editions de l’Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/books.editionsehess.1538

Wagner, W. (2007). Vernacular science knowledge: Its role in everyday life communication. Public Understanding of Science, 16(1), 7–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662506071785 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662506071785

Wagner, W., & Kronberger, N. (2002). Discours et appropriation symbolique de la biotechnologie. In C. Garnier (Org.), Les formes de la pensée sociale (p. 119–150). Presses Universitaires de France.

Downloads

Published

2023-10-22

Issue

Vol. 40 (2023)

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2023 Memorandum: Memory and History in Psychology

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

The works published in the electronic journal Memorandum: Memory and history in Psychology are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License that allows sharing with acknowledgment of authorship and initial publication in this journal.

How to Cite

Before Louise Brown: social representations of the in vitro embryo in the press. (2023). Memorandum: Memory and History in Psychology , 40. https://doi.org/10.35699/1676-1669.2023.37922