1. The international perspective HI269 Week 10!

2. International Ideas of Kinship Is biology the only way to construct kinship relations? Yap: Kinship defined by shared landholding Navajo: Childrearing, not birthing, determine maternity (in a matrilineal society) Ecuador: kinship determined by sharing of food Malaysia: siblings are those who have nursed at same breast, for example.

3. Birth control policies beyond the west Zimbabwe: 1981 ban on long-acting injectible contraceptive Depo-provera Japan: abortion up to the limits of fetal viability available ‘for cause’ from MDs, BUT contraceptive pill only legalized in 1999, after 20 year battle – and then only after Viagra was approved in under 6 months…

4. Japan: Why abortion (and not the pill)? History? [the ‘lack of Christianity thesis’] Culture? [‘Fluidity’ of Buddhist view of life/ death, availability of rituals encompassing aborted fetuses] Definitions of personhood? [mizuko (fetus) literally translates as ‘water child’, not yet a full person]

5. Japan: Why abortion (and not the pill)? Abortion rights grated under ‘Eugenic Protection Law of 1948 and during period of economic distress combined with steeply rising population; Pill appeared at a time when burgeoning economic recovery was regarded as more important, and a time of falling birth rates and drug scandals; Abortions were/are lucrative for MDs, births for midwives, barrier technologies for family planners…Who was to profit from the Pill?

6. Zimbabwe: why not Depo- provera? Health risks? Poor testing? Imperial coercion? Anti Depo-provera campaign poster based on a poster designed by Women against Imperialism, San Francisco 

7. Zimbabwe: why not Depo-provera? Woman centred distribution/delivery mechanisms Use was ‘invisible’ so women could control decision-making, and could afford the treatment independent of family resources (countering the idea that women’s bodies were in fact ‘national bodies’ ) Also strongly associated with white power, racism, dumping: so using it was not just sneaky but traitorous.

8. Extract of Rhodesian Debate over Depo-Provera, taken from Kaler, p. 358

9. Questions to think about (especially as we get ready for next term!): Do different cultures integrate medical technologies differently? Do different models of ‘family’ and ‘individuality’ affect the relative (no pun intended!) impact of medical technologies on social and cultural identity? What effect do the particularities of national history have on different nations’ responses to new medical technologies?

10. Happy Holidays! Have a great break, and I’ll see you next year!