Situated Talk: A method for a reflexive encounter with #donorconceived on TikTok

Abstract

There is a pressing need to facilitate sensitive conversations between people with differing or opposing views. On video-sharing app TikTok, the diverse experiences of donor-conceived people and recipient parents sit uneasily alongside each other, coalescing in hashtags like #donorconceived. This article describes a method ‘Situated Talk’ which uses TikToks to facilitate a reflexive encounter, drawing on three areas of scholarship: media ethnography and elicitation, researcher reflexivity and duoethnography/collaborative autoethnography. We describe how we, as a donor-conceived adult (Giselle) and a queer woman who would need donor sperm to have a child (Clare), employed TikToks from #donorconceived as prompts to facilitate a sensitive conversation and elicit situated insights. We explore three central insights from applying our method: (1) discomfort as a productive tension; (2) unresolved dilemmas; and (3) discovering parallels in experience. Using TikToks as stimuli, ‘Situated Talk’ contributes an innovative method for generating grounded social media insights.

More than Humor: Memes as Bonding Icons for Belonging in Donor-Conceived People

“…Here we see how memes are used to demarcate the in-group from the out-group. Shane’s comment about “the pain [from] being told to be quiet” is particularly significant, as it communicates the lack of autonomy experienced by many donor-conceived people who wish to discuss the injustices they experience in relation to attempts to secure more information about their genetic relatives and the associated legal and social barriers (see also Newton & Southerton, 2021). Shane went on to provide an example of the way that conversations with family or friends often went:You’re trying to have this conversation with them, and you get questions like, “Don’t you love your parents?” Or, “Would you rather have not been born?” And so it’s like the trauma bit is wanting to express how the experience of being donor-conceived has impacted on me as an individual.…”

“…In reflexive thematic analysis, the researcher's subjectivity is viewed as a resource which contributes to the co-production of knowledge between researcher and participants (Braun & Clarke, 2020). All participants were made aware of the researcher's "insider" status as a donor-conceived person (see Newton & Southerton, 2021), and the manner in which issues of community confidentiality would be managed. This positionality was also viewed as advantageous in an empirical analysis of humor, as scholars have noted the importance of cultural awareness and sensitivity to local contexts (Sandberg & Tutenges, 2019).…”

Truth, Proof, Sleuth: Trust in Direct-to-Consumer DNA Testing and Other Sources of Identity Information among Australian Donor-Conceived People

“…Although questions relating to DNA testing formed part of the interview schedule, participants often raised their experiences with DNA testing prior to being prompted by the interviewer, reflecting the ubiquity of DNA testing in donor-conceived people’s social worlds. As a donor-conceived person herself, GN had been a member of donor conception Facebook groups for a number of years prior to the study and had also participated in DNA testing in order to connect with biological family members (see also Newton, in press; Newton and Southerton, 2021). All participants were (made) aware of GN’s ‘insider’ status before or during the interview, which supported rapport, trust and confidence towards both the interview and broader study (Andreassen, 2018; Taylor, 2011).…”

“…Indeed, scholars have highlighted the extraordinary power and ‘kinship knowledge-management’ regimes of medical institutions and other regulatory bodies involved in the governance of donor conception (Klotz, 2016: 51; see also Crawshaw, 2020). These issues, which may cause feelings of frustration, anger and/or powerlessness are frequently discussed among donor-conceived peers who have formed online communities to share their experiences, access support and exchange information (Adams and Lorbach, 2012; Crawshaw et al, 2016; Darroch and Smith, 2021; Harrigan et al, 2015; Newton and Southerton, 2021; Newton et al, 2022). In this way, these modes of digital sociality offer emancipatory power since practices within the fertility industry can be explored and exposed (Andreassen, 2018).…”

Embodied sociotechnical imaginaries: how donor-conceived people imagine identity, family and reprodigital futures beyond regulation

“…Indeed, since 2000, donor-conceived peers have been interacting online, initially via Yahoo groups, which were superseded in the following decade by closed Facebook groups (26,38,39). Such social media platforms have not only been key to community formation but also activist organising for legislative reform and exchange of information about direct-to-consumer DNA testing (27,30,40,41). DNA testing offers many donor-conceived people more (timely) information than government donor registries, given that testing can be conducted in a short timeframe, at any age and offer a broader set of "matches" beyond the donor and donorconceived person (22,27).…”