How Perceptions of Responsibility and Affective Consequences Influence Parents’ Digital Media Engagement in Relation to Human Papillomavirus Vaccination

Individuals are expected to be responsible for their own health and that of their families—and act accordingly. Yet, being in a position of responsibility might be undesirable for individuals either unable or reluctant to comply with the expectations this responsibility entails. In this article, I explore how parents experience the process of engaging responsibly with digital media in relation to the question of human papillomavirus vaccination. The study is based on interviews with eighteen Danish parents, and my findings show that these parents not only understand themselves but also other actors in terms of responsibility, and that being positioned in terms of responsibility can have negative affective consequences. I argue that meeting the expectations of biological citizenship should not necessarily be a goal in relation to complex health topics.

Diagnostic Citizenship and the Biopolitical Uptake of COVID-19 Detection

This essay examines an oddity of SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic testing—referred to here as a ‘persistent positive’—in which an individual can test positive for COVID-19 for weeks or even months after initial infection despite no longer being symptomatic or contagious. In Florida, where recent legislation requires healthcare workers affected by COVID-19 to have two negative test results before they can return to work, the issue of persistent positives poses a significant challenge for a small sub-group. I identify an important disconnect between the biological and the biopolitical where SARS-CoV-2 test results are mis-inscribed into biopolitics as bureaucratic state legal codes and employment requirements. Using ethnographic evidence, I show how their test results are less important than the state’s interpretation and enactment of these test results. I describe a techno-political phenomenon wherein the technical (in this case diagnostic testing) selectively offers up rights to those recovering from COVID-19. Those with persistent positives performatively engage in testing as a means of navigating the legal codes that deny them the right to work. Testing for them is an attempt to return to a normal life, not to find out whether they are living an abnormal one. A breed of biological citizenship, perhaps a diagnostic citizenship, is formed in which they need a certain result, no matter what that result means biologically, in order to exercise certain rights. These reflections encourage a rethink about the role of testing technology as an instrument of government and biomedical authority more broadly.

It’s in Me to Give: Canadian Gay, Bisexual, and Queer Men’s Willingness to Donate Blood If Eligible Despite Feelings of Policy Discrimination

Blood donation policies governing men who have sex with men have shifted significantly over time in Canada—from an initial lifetime ban in the wake of the AIDS crisis to successive phases of time-based deferment requiring periods of sexual abstinence (5 years to 1 year to 3 months). We interviewed 39 HIV-negative gay, bisexual, queer, and other sexual minority men (GBM) in Vancouver, Toronto, and Montreal to understand their willingness to donate blood if eligible. Transcripts were coded following inductive thematic analysis. We found interrelated and competing expressions of biological and sexual citizenship. Most participants said they were “safe”/“low risk” and “willing” donors and would gain satisfaction and civic pride from donation. Conversely, a smaller group neither prioritized the collectivizing biological citizenship goals associated with expanding blood donation access nor saw this as part of sexual citizenship priorities. Considerable repair work is required by Canada’s blood operators to build trust with diverse GBM communities.

Biological citizenship in the reliability democracy

In this paper, I shall present the theoretical view on the reliability democracy as presented in Prijic Samarzija?s book Democracy and Truth (2018), and examine its validity through the case of the division of epistemic labour in the process of deliberation on autism treatment policies. It may appear that because of their strong demands, namely, the demand for rejection of medical authority and for exclusive expertise on autism, autistic individuals gathered around the neurodiversity movement present a threat to the reliability democracy.