Professor Tina Miller

Feminist scholarship has continued to map the multiple ways in which practices of caring and paid work sustain gender inequality. A recurrent focus has examined how caring and paid work “choices”are made and their corresponding gendered effects, particularly for women in the home, work place and beyond. In spite of shifts in education, employment and equality-focused legislation, the sharing of familial caring responsibilities for children has been particularly resistant to significant change.One attempt to explain this obduracy has been through the concept of “maternal gatekeeping” devel-oped in the 1990s. This concept typically describes and measures maternal behaviours that “block”paternal involvement and so apparently “protects” maternal privilege/power. However, as societal ideals — and some practices — of involved fatherhood shift, a more critical engagement with the concept of “gatekeeping” as a singularly maternal practise, is timely. Drawing upon findings from two comparative UK based qualitative longitudinal studies, this paper urges a more critical examination of practices of maternal and paternal gatekeeping as parental choreographing of caring practices and responsibilities unfold.

This paper explores the process of going back in qualitative longitudinal research (QLR) to gather later accounts of unfolding personal experiences. The design of interview-based QLR is usually premised on collecting data, over-time, around an unfolding experience or event. This design facilitates the establishment of an on-going research relationship and ‘rapport’ and the accessing of fluid and timesensitive accounts of individual experiences, leading to more nuanced understandings of temporal subjectivities. However in practice maintaining a sample in QL research, which may span a number of years, can be challenging and the process of going back, complicated. This paper reflects on issues and responsibilities which can arise when researchers try to access and go back to participants, especially where experiences once optimistically narrated and future-oriented have unfolded in unplanned and personally unwelcome ways. Using researcher experiences and the data from later phases of two UK based QLR studies on transition

to first-time motherhood and first-time fatherhood, the practical steps of maintaining contact, reconnecting with participants and going back are documented. How does the passage of time and changes in participant’s lives alter research relationships, interpretations of data and researcher responsibilities?

The ‘involved’ father, who is emotionally and economically engaged, has become a recognisable ideal in many Western societies. Policy changes have to varying degrees endorsed practices of involvement especially around the time of birth and during the early weeks and months of a child’s life. Discursive changes are discernible too as men engage a language of caring, bonding and emotional, intimate connection through ‘being there’ as a father. And research on the everyday practices of fathers also indicates some degree of change. But how far are these shifts indicative of a new type of fatherhood? In this article we document key research findings, assess their significance and most importantly assess what is the cumulative effect of these changes. We conclude that while contemporary practices of fathering must be understood and explained within broader cultural and economic milieu, the multiplicity of shifts does indeed infer a new durability.

This paper examines men’s experiences of fertility/infertility against a backdrop of changing understandings of men’s role in society and medical possibilities. It presents findings from two qualitative research projects on men’s experiences of engagement with reproductive health services as they sought to become fathers and anticipate impending fatherhood. The findings from both projects provide insights into men’s experiences of (in)fertility and their engagement with services set against cultural ideals of masculinity. Discussions of reproduction have historically focused most centrally upon women’s bodies and maternal processes, leaving little space for consideration of men’s experiences and perspectives. While women’s experiences of infertility/fertility have been characterized in relation to productive or faulty biological processes, male infertility has been largely invisible and male fertility typically assumed. This context provides a difficult terrain for men in which to contemplate the potential of not being able to father a child. The findings discussed in this paper illuminate the ways in which men talk about and make sense of their reproductive journeys. In doing so, it challenges current understandings of masculinity and reproductive bodies and highlights the need to rethink how men are treated in reproductive spheres and how services to men are delivered.

This paper examines the results of two interview studies that explored men’s experiences of fertility and infertility against a backdrop of changing understandings of men’s role in society and rapidly changing medical possibilities. It draws together two separate qualitative research projects that explored men’s experiences of seeking to become fathers. One followed men as they became fathers for the first time, the other was a study of men’s experiences of infertility. The findings from both projects are analysed to provide insights into men’s experiences of fertility and infertility and their engagement with health services, set against current social and cultural ideas of masculinity. Before the advent of fertility treatment, discussions of reproduction focused almost exclusively on the woman’s body. Pregnancy and childbirth was women’s business. There was little consideration of men’s experiences and perspectives. Although male factor infertility is now a leading cause of couples seeking treatment, the focus remains the woman. As assisted reproduction treatment has developed over the last half-century, most social and psychological research has explored the woman’s perspective. The findings discussed in this paper illuminate the ways in which men try and make sense of their own successful or unsuccessful reproductive journeys. In doing so it challenges current understandings of masculinity and reproductive bodies. It also highlights how we need to perhaps rethink how men are treated in reproductive spheres and how services to men are delivered.

Informed consent is a concept which attempts to capture and convey what is regarded as the appropriate relationship between researcher and research participant. Definitions have traditionally emphasised respect for autonomy and the right to self-determination of the individual. However, the meaning of informed consent and the values on which it is based are grounded in society and the practicalities of social relationships. As society changes, so too do the meaning and practice of informed consent. In this paper, we trace the ways in which the meaning and practice of informed consent has changed over the last 35 years with reference to four qualitative studies of parenting and children in the UK which we have undertaken at different points in our research careers. We focus in particular on the shifting boundaries between the professional and personal, and changing expressions of agency and power in a context of heightened perceptions of risk in everyday life. We also discuss developments in information and communication technologies as a factor in changing both the formal requirements for and the situated practicalities of obtaining informed consent. We conclude by considering the implications for informed consent of both increasing bureaucratic regulation and increasingly sophisticated information and communication technologies and suggest strategies for rethinking and managing ‘consent’ in qualitative research practice.