Doctoral Dissertation Research: Technology, Healthcare Access, and the Bioeconomy

About This Grant

This research examines how healthcare practices and economic conditions affect patient access to assisted reproductive technologies and how family building options are impacted by changing social and regulatory environments. Specifically, this doctoral dissertation examines and compares how fertility treatment governance shapes healthcare delivery and patient experiences through an investigation of the sociocultural and economic factors influencing donor assisted reproductive technologies in two contexts: one where access to fertility treatment has been in flux, and another where health services are being curtailed by market-driven healthcare reforms. The research asks what cultural and socioeconomic variables influence access to these technologies, how prospective parents are navigating changing landscapes of access, and how this specific bioeconomy is structured and functions in these contexts. The broader impacts include training a graduate student in scientific anthropological methodology, and disseminating the data and results through academic publications, policy briefs, and public engagement initiatives to improve the public’s understanding of the scientific analysis of the bioeconomy. The investigators employ ethnographic methods including clinical and participant observation and semi-structured interviews with 80 participants across both sites, including healthcare providers, intended parents, and egg donors. This systematic investigation analyzes how varying approaches influence clinical practices and patient outcomes. The study contributes to medical anthropological theory by examining how political economy and embodiment shape reproductive healthcare. Through rigorous scientific methods, this research advances understanding of healthcare system adaptation while providing practical insights for developing sustainable frameworks for reproductive care access. This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.