Existing research has explored the rhetoric surrounding women’s health, fertility, and motherhood, as well as the effect of medical discourse practices on patients’ understanding and decision-making in reproductive and other health contexts. I build on this work to examine the use and impact of common language surrounding pregnancy and miscarriage, especially for older mothers—particularly the terms advanced maternal age, blighted ovum, and expectant management. Drawing from rhetorical and autoethnographic methods, I argue that these terms function constitutively to shape sense-making about processes that otherwise exist only sub-clinically, and do so in ways that reify risk but also clearly demarcate the limitations of medical care. Broadly, this research contributes to our understanding of the ways that medical rhetoric shapes experience and understanding about reproductive health-related issues, and it also provides a foundation to more effectively communicate with pregnant women, and especially older mothers, about their care options.

Drawing from my experience conducting an interview-based study on vaccine hesitancy, this essay explores the ethical negotiations RHM researchers face when recruiting participants from online communities, and especially communities that are stigmatized or otherwise distrustful of researchers. I discuss the specific challenges I faced during this process, and offer four suggestions for researchers engaged in this work. These include the valuable role of reflexive journaling, the need for participant input in the distribution of recruitment messages, the importance of accounting for the dynamic nature of online communication, and the ways that participant communication online may shape off-line interactions. This essay can offer guidance to RHM scholars facing similar situations, and contribute to the broader conversation about practice-level ethical concerns in RHM research involving online communities