Möllering has argued for sociological research on trust that pays attention to the ‘fine details of interpretation’ and begins from the perspectives of those engaged in relations of trust. In this article we explore what it would mean to take up Möllering’s challenge to explore the interpretative elements of trust and the ‘leaps of faith’ trusting entails.We do this through an empirical study of parental and professional talk about the MMR (measles, mumps and rubella) vaccination. We examine trust as operating in a number of interrelated ways: as a practice based on knowledge; as a ‘leap of faith’ experienced through relationality and familiarity; as working at a system level; and as shaped by relations of governance and by anxieties to do with the nature of social and technological change. Through this analysis, we suggest how an interpretive approach to thinking about trust is a worthwhile exercise.

The focus of this special issue is on how everyday or mundane materialities actively mediate health and care practices. This article extends this concern with the mundane to care itself and explores how specific materialities, such as shared spaces and everyday objects, not only mediate mundane care but enable it to happen. Our focus is on mundane help in the context of ill health, between people who are not immediate family, such as neighbours, acquaintances and others with whom we interact in our daily lives. Drawing on recent empirical studies of low-level support in two different parts of the UK, we show how the materialities of care can mediate the affective risks associated with receiving such help. Specifically, we investigate how materialities help people to balance the expression of their vulnerability with a need to retain their dignity, a practice referred to as 'holding one's own'. In doing so, we argue that materialities are not just the conduits for care - what care passes through - or things that mediate care. We suggest instead that materialities are part of how relationships of mundane care are constituted and maintained.

This article makes the case for a sociological engagement with kindness. Although virtually ignored by sociologists we tend to know kindness when we see it and to feel its absence keenly. We suggest there are four features of 'ordinary' kindness which render it sociologically relevant: its infrastructural quality; its unobligated character; its micro or inter-personal focus and its atmospheric potential. This latter quality is not the 'maelstrom of affect' associated with urban living but can subtly alter how we feel and what we do. We illustrate these features through a study of everyday help and support. In doing so, we argue that-as much as Simmel's blasé outlook-small acts of kindness are part of how we can understand city living and that, despite the cultural trope of randomness, a sociologically adequate account of kindness needs to recognise the ways in which it is socially embedded and differentiated

No abstract

Drawing on a UK research study on immunization, this article investigates parents' understandings of the relationship between themselves, their infants, other bodies, the state, and cultural practices - material and symbolic. The article argues that infant bodies are best thought of as always social bundles, rather than as biobundles made social through state intervention; and concludes that, while the natural/cultural divide may now be widely accepted as artificial within the social sciences, we need to scrutinize how people in their everyday lives work out, and invest in, the distinction between the two