the placental body in 4D: everyday practices of non-diagnostic sonography
- 39 Downloads
Feminist scholars have long argued that the pregnant body is erased – both literally and discursively – from mainstream foetal representations. Janemaree Maher argues that the placenta, as point of distinction and connection between pregnant women and foetuses, has the radical potential to refigure understandings of pregnant embodiment and subjectivity, and offer ‘a way to begin thinking through the impasse of pregnant representation’. Drawing on Maher's notion of the ‘placental body’, this article will examine the place of the placenta in the practice of non-diagnostic 4D ultrasound scanning. The analysis seeks to connect Maher's theoretical perspective, and the rich feminist literature around foetal imaging, with observational data from my study of 4D scans. I will argue that the capacity of 3- and 4D sonography to image the placenta and umbilical cord in a way that is newly intelligible to lay viewers might present an opportunity for thinking differently about the interconnections – material and social – between pregnant women and foetuses and to relocate women as the subjects of their pregnancies.
Keywordspregnancy placenta sonography non-diagnostic ultrasound keepsake scans
My thanks to the women and their families who allowed me to observe their scans and to the sonographers who took part in the study. My gratitude also to Ann Kaloski for her support. This article is based on my doctoral research undertaken at the Centre for Women's Studies, University of York and funded by the Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC).
- Adams, A.E. (1994) Reproducing the Womb: Images of Childbirth in Science, Feminist Theory, and Literature, Ithaca: Cornell University.Google Scholar
- Birke, L. (1999) Feminism and the Biological Body, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
- Duden, B. (1993) Disembodying Women: Perspectives on Pregnancy & the Unborn, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Franklin, S. (1991) ‘Fetal fascinations: new dimensions of the medical-scientific construction of fetal personhood’ in Lury C. and Stacey J. (1991) editors, Off-Centre: Feminism and Cultural Studies, London: HarperCollins Academic.Google Scholar
- Gonçalves, L.F., Lee, W., Espinoza, J. and Romero, R. (2005) ‘Three- and 4-dimensional ultrasound in obstetric practice: does it help?’ Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine, Vol. 24: 1599–1624.Google Scholar
- Lambert, V. (2006) ‘Is this a souvenir too far?’ The Telegraph (online), 10 August http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main.jhtml?xml=/arts/2006/08/10/bafoetus10.xml, (accessed 11 August 2006).
- Maher, J. (2001) ‘The promiscuous placenta: crossing over’ in Bashford A. and Hooker C. (2001) editors, Contagion: Historical and Cultural Studies, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Nathanielsz, P.W. (1992) Life Before Birth: The Challenges of Fetal Development, New York: WH Freeman and Company.Google Scholar
- Nelson, T.R., Downey, D.B., Pretorius, D.H. and Fenster, A. (1999) Three-Dimensional Ultrasound, Philadelphia, New York, Baltimore: Lippencott Williams & Wilkins.Google Scholar
- Newman, K. (1996) Fetal Positions: Individualism, Science, Visuality, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
- Palmer, J. (2007) The Visible Techno-Foetus: Ultrasound Imagery and its Non-Medical Significances in Everyday Contexts, PhD thesis. York: University of York.Google Scholar
- Palmer, J. (2008) ‘The ‘technofetus’ as citizen: the impact of three-dimensional ultrasound’ in Olesky E.H. Petö A. and Waaldijk B. (2008) editors, Gender and CItizenship in a Multicultural Context, Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
- Petchesky, R.P. (1987) ‘Foetal images: the power of visual culture in the politics of reproduction’ in Stanworth M. (1987) editor, Reproductive Technologies: Gender, Motherhood and Medicine, Cambridge and Oxford: Polity Press in association with Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
- Rados, C. (2004) FDA Cautions Against Ultrasound ‘Keepsake’ Images, [Online] FDA Consumer Magazine, http://www.fda.gov/fdac/features/2004/104_images.html, (accessed 18 January 2007).
- Rurak, D.W. (2001) ‘Development and function of the placenta’ in Harding R. and Bocking A.D. (2001) editors, Fetal Growth and Development, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Stabile, C.A. (1994) Feminism and the Technological Fix, Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
- Taylor, J.S. (1998) ‘Image of contradiction: obstetrical ultrasound in American culture’ in Franklin S. and Ragoné H. (1998) editors, Reproducing Reproduction: Kinship, Power and Technological Innovation, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
- Tyler, I. (2000) ‘Reframing pregnant embodiment’ in Ahmed S., Kilby J., Lury C., Mcneil M. and Skeggs B. (2000) editors, Transformations: Thinking Through Feminism, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Tyler, I. (2001) ‘Skin-tight: celebrity, pregnancy and subjectivity’ in Ahmed S. and Stacey J. (2001) editors, Thinking Through the Skin, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Woo, J. (n.d.) Obstetric Ultrasound: A Comprehensive Guide, [Online], http://www.ob-ultrasound.net, (accessed 25 April 2005).
- Young, I.M. (1990) ‘Pregnant embodiment: subjectivity and alienation’ in Young I.M. (1990) editor, Throwing Like a Girl and Other Essays in Feminist Philosophy, Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar