Replacement feeding and the HIV Diaspora: A case of ontological multiplicity and fluid technologies

Treating Mycoplasma genitalium (in pregnancy): a social and reproductive justice concern

Antimicrobial Resistance is a threat to individual and to population health and to future generations, requiring "collective sacrifices" in order to preserve antibiotic efficacy. 'Who should make the sacrifices?' and 'Who will most likely make them?' are ethical concerns posited as potentially manageable through Antimicrobial Stewardship. Antimicrobial stewardship almost inevitably involves a form of clinical cost-benefit analysis that assesses the possible effects of antibiotics to treat a diagnosed infection in a particular patient. However, this process rarely accounts properly for patients - above and beyond assessments of potential (non)compliance or adherence to care regimes. Drawing on a vignette of a pregnant woman of colour and migrant diagnosed with Mycoplasma genitalium, a sexually transmissible bacterium, this article draws out some of the ethical, speculative, and practical tensions and complexities involved in Antimicrobial Stewardship. We argue that patients also engage in a form of cost-benefit analysis influenced by experiences of reproductive and social (in)justice and comprising speculative variables - to anticipate future possibilities. These processes have the potential to have effects above and beyond the specific infection antimicrobial stewardship was activated to address. We contend that efforts to practice and research antimicrobial stewardship should accommodate and incorporate these variables and acknowledge the structures they emerge with(in), even if their components remain unknown. This would involve recognising that antimicrobial stewardship is intricately connected to other social justice issues such as immigration policy, economic justice, access to appropriate medical care, racism, etc.

"We decided together": a qualitative study about women with HIV navigating infant-feeding decisions with the father of their children

BACKGROUND

The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that women with HIV breastfeed for a minimum of one year. In contrast, United Kingdom (UK) guidelines encourage formula feeding, but breastfeeding can be supported under certain circumstances. Infant-feeding decisions often involve personal and social networks. Currently, little research addresses how individuals with HIV in high-income countries navigate infant-feeding decisions with the father of their children.

METHODS

Semi-structured remote interviews were conducted with UK-based individuals with a confirmed HIV positive diagnosis who were pregnant or one-year postpartum, and two partners. Using purposive sampling, pregnant and postpartum participants were recruited through HIV NHS clinics and community-based organisations, and where possible, fathers were recruited via them. Data were analysed using thematic analysis and organised using NVivo 12.

RESULTS

Of the 36 women interviewed, 28 were postpartum. The majority were of Black African descent (n = 22) and born outside the UK. The key factors in women navigating HIV and infant-feeding discussions with respect to their baby's father were the latter's: (1) awareness of woman's HIV status; (2) relationship with the woman; (3) confidence in infant-feeding decision; (4) support and opinion about woman's infant-feeding intentions. Most women made a joint decision with biological fathers when in a long-term (> one year) relationship with them. Single women tended not to discuss their infant-feeding decision with the father of their child, often for safety reasons.

CONCLUSION

Women in ongoing relationships with the father of their child valued their support and opinions regarding infant-feeding. In contrast, single women chose not to involve the father for reasons of privacy and safety. Clinical teams and community-based organisations should support mothers in discussing infant-feeding decisions regardless of relationship status. When appropriate, they should also support discussions with their partners, but remain sensitive to circumstances where this may put women at risk.