Search results

Purpose – To examine how youth appropriate and resist elements of the developmental discourse as they construct and enforce dating norms.

Methodology – In 2007, we conducted participant observation at a middle school summer camp for youth in sixth, seventh, and eighth grades. Youth ranged in age from 11 to 17 years old.

Findings – Youth borrowed the idea of a normative sequence of behaviors arranged by age from the developmental discourse to establish a set of age-appropriate dating norms for all campers, regardless of chronological age. Youth enforced these norms by treating other dating actions as too young or too old. By tying this linear trajectory to social age instead of chronological age, youth creatively altered the apparently rigid developmental discourse and established dating norms which addressed their own values and concerns. Youth established dating norms and maximized opportunities for pleasurable, collective discussions about dating and romantic relationships. Although the developmental discourse influenced the norms in this peer culture, we argue that the small, heterogeneous composition of the camp facilitated youths' ability to appropriate, refashion, and resist the developmental discourse.

David A. Kinney is professor of sociology at Central Michigan University. He obtained his Ph.D. in sociology from Indiana University at Bloomington, completed postdoctoral research at the University of Chicago and worked as a research development specialist for the U.S. Department of Education in Philadelphia. His primary research areas are sociology of adolescence and sociology of education. He has published articles and chapters on children's time use, adolescent peer cultures, and education in venues such as Sociology of Education, Youth and Society, American Behavioral Research Scientist, and The Praeger Handbook of American High Schools. He is past president of the Michigan Sociological Association and elected council member of the American Sociological Association sections on Sociology of Children and Youth and Sociology of Education. He became series editor of this volume in 1999 and has been series co-editor with Katherine Brown Rosier since 2004.

Twin to Twin Transfusion Syndrome (TTTS) is a well understood, yet under-recognized, placental disease affecting any given pregnancy at a rate of 1 in 1,000. There is no clustering of TTTS; instead the threat remains pathologically distinctive due to its pervasiveness. However, while incidence rates are random, survival rates are not. Despite compliant acceptance of “routine prenatal care,” sadly, there are many women who for currently unknown reasons are not receiving the advanced prenatal care needed to appropriately screen for, diagnosis and treat TTTS. And these women are paying the ultimate price for such obstetrical oversight.

This study hypothesizes that differential care being given by primary obstetricians of TTTS patients is resulting in experienced inequalities. Utilizing social reproduction theory, and through ethnographic and quantitative analyses of primary data, this study seeks to divulge the complex social processes taking place (or failing to take place) within the world of American obstetrics, and begin to understand how they are affecting TTTS mortality and morbidity rates.

Findings illuminate a profound imbalance of power and influence amongst the following entities: American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and Society of Maternal Fetal Medicine; obstetrical training and practice; and levels of patient awareness and advocacy.

This study argues that the current social relations being reproduced by these entities are perpetuating a climate that allows for disregard of proper TTTS management. Specifically, this study theoretically explores what social relations and subsequent (in)actions are being reproduced prior to TTTS diagnoses, and applies the effects of those observations.