Techno-parenthood‘s tensions in lithuania: experiences of becoming parents through the use of assisted reproduction

Technologies are changing parenthood. It is no longer linked only to heterosexual couples raising genetically related children. Tradition forces to ignore the fact that parenthood is techno-parenthood. It takes time to accept the modified idea of parenthood. Therefore, parenthood enabled by Assisted Reproduction (AR) has become probably the biggest biopolitics’ challenge in Lithuania. The Law on Assisted Reproduction only came into force in 2017. The admission of technology-enabled parenthood is a shift in the state-supported parenthood regime. Although, accepting of this shift is still happening in society. Therefore, it is important to investigate how the challenges of common acceptance influences the parents affected by that. The object is the experiences of becoming parents through the AR. The aim is to disclose tensions arising for IVF parents and their efforts to overcome them. Objectives: to reveal attitudes of IVF parents to tensions arising from normative stereotypes of parenthood (1); To reveal their attitudes to the state role in their parenthood (2); To present the efforts to overcome those tensions (3). Tensions are determined by traditional approaches of parenthood. The notion that having children is mandatory leads to a sense that children in society are seen as the “purpose” of life, but on the other hand it should not be achieved in the way that is possible to individuals that need the help of AR. The notion contributes to the reduction of the problem of infertility – it makes people struggling to conceive feel incomprehensible to society. Also, the experiences of parents are affected by the belief, that having children is not for everyone, which mostly comes from the Catholic community. Participants perceive Catholics as shaping a public opinion to see infertile people as those for whom parenthood is not destined. It complicates the decision making on AR and prevents people from sharing their parenthood stories. This parenthood is also influenced by the heteronormative concept of parenthood - a child must be born after the marriage of heterosexual spouses. As a result, these parents sometimes feel a spotlight on their children. Heteronormative notion is also legitimized by law as it only supports heterosexual married parents. It differently affects the parenthood of research participants and other technology-enabled parenthoods. Participants are disturbed by the marriage requirement imposed only on their parenthood. The requirement makes marriage one of stages in the process of AR. Meanwhile, paternities of single women and same-sex couples are left out of possibility. Informants see the Law of Assisted Reproduction as a positive response of the state according to their expectations. However, they criticize the embryos’ policy by which the state supposedly draws moral instructions in line with the guideline of the Church. And thus, state attempts to make this parenthood fitting to conservative values rather than the expectations of informants. Informants may not (consciously) want to emphasize the issue of embryos (as Catholics do), as this may remain a moral challenge for themselves. However, compulsory storage of embryos restricts freedom of choice and connects the lives of these parents to the state. This can be seen as an obstacle to feel like 'normal' parents. Participants often attribute responsibility for complicating their paternity’s recognition to the Church. The choice to overcome infertility with the help of technology makes them feel unwelcomed in the Church or to reconsider their relationship to it. Parents, especially mothers, make efforts to reduce tensions. They strive to make this parenthood familiar in the public and to form reinforcing communities. Participants believe that with appropriate changes their parenthood will be seen as open, familiar, not stigmatized and available to everyone who are determined to become a mother and father regardless of infertility