Being diagnosed HIV-positive when one is pregnant means entering into these two contradictory identities, which independently hold complex meanings of loss and gain, creativity and destructiveness, and which collide in the same moment in time. Motherhood is the ultimate act of creativity, in which life is given form. The miracle of life, however, is reminiscent of the nearness of death (Pines, 1997); creating another being evokes fears of destructiveness directed towards something so helpless (Parker, 1995); while the gain of motherhood also involves loss of identity in the service of motherhood (Oakley, 1980), as well as fears of the loss of one’s child. HIV evokes very different associations of creativity and destructiveness. Something has been created in one’s body that is trying to destroy one. This directly evokes the oppositions of life and death, particularly because outward signs of the virus cannot be seen for a potentially significant period of time before serious illness sets in. Questions of what one is to accomplish in one’s life, as well as how one is going to die – universal questions that most of us spend a fair amount of time avoiding – become more urgent with an HIV-positive diagnosis. These questions take on a particular quality in relation to the social significations of HIV; to morality, death and abjection; and to calls to ‘live positively’. With the promise of antiretroviral medication, the progression of the virus can be retarded, which may make a significant difference to one’s health. However, in the inner world where fear is as important as reality, the existence of the virus inside one’s body encourages one to contemplate death. In the social world of discursive meanings, an HIV-positive diagnosis is responded to with prejudice and rejection, regardless of how healthy or unhealthy one is.
Becoming an HIV-positive mother means that these opposites meet one another within one person, evoking love and hate, tragedy and joy, fear and hope simultaneously. HIV-positive motherhood also causes uncertainty regarding one’s own identity, one’s future and the future of one’s baby. Because HIV can possibly (but not probably) be transmitted from mother to child, uncertainty regarding whether one will transmit HIV to one’s child provides fertile and perilous soil for fantasy. This uncertainty occurs in the context of dominant discourses of motherhood that posit that the baby is all-important; the mother not at all. Making sense of oneself as a mother – for one’s baby, but also for oneself – means negotiating the strong emotional resonances of HIV-positive motherhood through very powerful and socially sanctioned discourses of both motherhood and HIV.
This uneasy existence of HIV-positive motherhood between these two wildly differing extremes may be part of the reason for the discomfort the HIV-positive mother provokes in the popular and scientific imagination. There seems to be a sense that, within the urgency of the HIV pandemic, HIV-positive mothers are not terribly important – or, at least, not as important as their children – or as women who, still innocent, are not yet infected. This is borne out in the available literature on HIV-positive motherhood. The few books that have been written are biographical in nature and concern an individual mother and/or her child. This is strikingly reflected in the personal and emotive titles of these books. Writing about HIV-positive motherhood in this genre implies a painfully individual experience – one mother isolated with her child or children and with her tragedy and triumph. The small body of empirical literature that studies HIV-positive mothers, in contrast, seems to be obsessed with the implicit assumption that HIV-positive mothers must be bad mothers, with a lack of attention to HIV-positive motherhood as a category in its own right. Mothers are usually only of interest insofar as they pose a risk to children and family. Focusing on the well-being of children poses a danger that the mother fades out of focus and becomes seen only as a vehicle for her baby’s well-being.
Given the stigma that many HIV-positive mothers experience, this book resists these morally evaluative questions. It explores mothers’ experiences of themselves as HIV-positive, and as mothers imagining themselves from their children’s perspectives and from their own perspectives. The decision to shift focus to the mother is as much a political choice as one informed by the paucity of knowledge about HIV-positive motherhood. The book explores maternal experience by focusing on the stories of real women. It is based on interviews conducted with black South African mothers diagnosed as HIV-positive when pregnant.1 Pregnant women and new mothers who attended an HIV clinic in Johannesburg were invited to volunteer to take part in individual interviews exploring their experiences of being HIV-positive and of motherhood. The interviews started with the question, ‘What has the experience been like for you?’ and, although I had a specific series of questions in mind, from that initial question on the interviews largely went wherever it was important for participants to take them. The interview content is included in the appendix to this book. In all, 110 interviews were conducted with 50 women. Some women chose to participate in a single interview, while others attended between two and seven interviews. All the women were invited to participate in multiple interviews depending upon what felt comfortable for them. Some participants were counsellors at the clinic, and these interviews formed a backdrop for the analysis. The opportunity to conduct a large number of interviews, as well as the richness and sophistication with which women brought their experiences into the interviews, has been invaluable in understanding the nuances of HIV-positive motherhood from the subjectivity of mothers themselves. It also became clear that the category ‘HIV-positive mother’ is a fiction: while motherhood was regularly coloured by HIV and produced particular concerns and ways of interacting with children, it did not produce a particular brand of motherhood, and there were as many differences in mothering as there were similarities.2
The presentation of women’s stories in this book draws on the traditions of discourse analysis and psychoanalysis. Discourse analysis provides a method for analysing the ways in which subjects and objects are constructed within power relations and through broader social meanings. Psychoanalysis offers ways of reading fantasies, conflicts, anxieties and desires and of foregrounding layers of affect. It should be noted, however, that the intention is not to ‘psychoanalyse’, individualise or pathologise, but rather to trace the interactions between psychodynamic and discursive processes in the negotiation of motherhood and HIV status in order to understand the contradictory subject positions held. A primary aim of Contradicting Maternity is to convey a rich sense of the experience of being an HIV-positive mother. To this end, it has been important to conjure up the lives and imaginations of the women who participated in this study without constructing them as irrevocably ‘other’. Relying heavily on stories and quotations, the book aims to convey a thick description of the experiences and preoccupations of HIV-positive mothers in relation to their sexuality, their relationships, their bodies, their babies and their own maternal perspectives.
Images of HIV-positive Motherhood
A central argument of the book is that maternal HIV-positive experience is more complex than the caricatures presented in the public and scientific imagination, and that it is important to understand HIV-positive motherhood from the mother’s perspective, and not just from the more seductive and socially sanctioned perspective of her child. One way of thinking about the social imagination of HIV-positive motherhood is through images of HIV-positive mothers. When I came upon the photographs presented below through contemplating the disjunctions between social discourses and lived experiences of HIV-infected maternity, my first response to the photographs was of both familiarity and shock, since they were so patently about human suffering. Images contextualise, because ‘seeing comes before words’ (Berger, 1972: 7). Photographs give the reader faces and environments that cannot be conveyed in words.
As I examined the photographs further, however, it became clear that this is not all photographs do. They also objectify, exploit, distance and victimise (Berger, 1972; Sontag, 2003). They create a disturbance of ownership, transforming subject into object, owned now by the photographer and the onlooker (Barthes, 1980). This is perhaps particularly the case when one regards the pain of others (Sontag, 2003), a genre of photography that has become almost synonymous with ‘art’. The more gruesome the photograph, the more ‘serious’ the photographer. In this sense, photographs decontextualise. As Barthes (1980: 90) puts it, a photograph ‘is without culture: when it is painful, nothing in it can transform grief into mourning’.
As