Of Rats and Women: Narratives of Motherhood in Environmental Epigenetics

Gendered imaginaries: situating knowledge of epigenetic programming of health

“…While we agree with these authors that ‘preconceptions about sex and gender’ are pivotal also in epigenetic and DOHaD research – and that these ‘give rise to specific figurations of motherhood […] that focus the responsibility/blame for the health of the offspring on the mother’ (Kenney and Müller : 40) – we argue that another main explanation for the limited role of paternal influences in these works lies in the ways biological experiments can study parental care, and consequently produce discursive resources to know and norm this issue in our societies. A careful look at the experimental practice producing an emphasis on mothers (i.e.…”

“…In other words, epigenetic research is both fuelling and being fuelled by preconceptions about women's role in society when drawing from the heuristic construction of the father being reduced solely to the qualities and attributes of sperm. This is the complementary explanation we provide for the gendered politics of reproduction prompting an increased control on women's bodies, choices, and lifestyles entailed in DOHaD and epigenetic biosciences (Kenney and Müller , Richardson and Stevens , Warin et al . ).…”

“…Specifically, our interviews show that scientists’ engagements with the role of parents in the epigenetic programming of the child's health escape their reduction to the fabrication of figurations such as the ‘mother‐as‐vector’ (Kenney and Müller , Richardson and Stevens ) and the ‘father‐as‐sperm’ detectable at its discursive level. First, DOHaD and epigenetics are – among some of our respondents, and notably male researchers – an element to bring with caution into the existing moral economies (i.e.…”

“…Within this context, epigenetic studies of developmental programming of health and disease are no exception, and can arguably be positioned in an innovating continuity with these established trends of gendered politics in reproduction. Martha Kenney and Ruth Müller (: 30) have shown how researchers in behavioural epigenetics often ‘reinforce preheld ideas about the role of mothers in the psychological and physical health of their offspring’, and make brisk overstated conclusions as to the meaning of findings in animal models for the understanding of human problems with regard to mothering behaviours. This is a particularly cogent issue, as recognised also by others (Lappé , Richardson and Stevens , Warin et al .…”

Enacting the molecular imperative: How gene-environment interaction research links bodies and environments in the post-genomic age

“…GEI researchers in our study articulated these demands as imperatives to molecularize and personalize the environment. As we detail below, GEI researchers enacted the imperative to molecularize through their routine collection of biological specimens, and experienced molecularization as a demand that they move their measures and methods ‘into the body.’ They argued that mustering “molecular credibility” (Kenney & Muller, forthcoming) — such as collecting and banking biological specimens for future analysis, measuring biomarkers or exposures in biospecimens, adding environmental measures to large genomic research consortia — has become requisite for good science in the post-genomic era. Yet even while GEI researchers sought to molecularize and personalize the environment, their practices did not always align with either these imperatives or their understandings of the health impacts of environmental and social complexity and social contexts.…”