Challenges

It was foreseeable that the research design, questions, and direction would change during data collection and analysis. The qualitative elements of this study relied on my interpretation—and another researcher might interpret the data differently, for “multiple

realities exist because we each perceive and interpret social life from different points of view”

(Saldaña, 2013, p. 8). Charmaz notes “Every researcher holds preconceptions that influence, but

may not determine what we attend to and how we make sense of it” (p. 156).

The main limitation of this work was that it is a single-case design. One case is not representative of or generalizable to others, nor is it designed to be. Mama Natural does not stand for all mommy bloggers or mothers who do not vaccinate their children, or any of the other facets that make her of interest to researchers. A case study about her cannot be used to tell us about all others like her, but that is acceptable because it is not designed to do so. Instead, it can shed light on theoretical constructs that broader research cannot be sensitive to,

the empirical depth reached by a single case can contribute by generating thorough description and theoretical understanding that can be sought in other cases and contexts. There were aspects of this case that I could not say with certainty are pertinent to other cases and contexts, though they held great import to understanding Genevieve. This is discussed further in section 5.5.1.

One methodological limitation of this work was that it did not utilize direct interaction

with the case as an evidence source. Yin considers the interview “one of the most important sources of case study evidence” (p. 110) though he notes that “interviews should always be

considered verbal reports only” (p. 113) especially because “Corroborating these views against other sources would not be as relevant as when you are dealing with behavioral events” (p.

113). At the time the research was undertaken, Mama Natural’s website said she did not respond to email inquiries (“About MamaNatural,” 2011), making contact a challenge.

Interviewing her would have presented such significant challenges in building rapport and trust that I did not think it would be a worthwhile use of time, especially given the immense amount of video diary-like evidence already available. Interviewing her followers also presented

challenges, as doing so with or without her consent would have disturbed the site more than necessary—something Creswell (2002, p. 181) cautions against.

2.10.1 Debriefing

Because I was the principal and sole investigator in this study, I chose to improve the validity of the findings with peer debriefing. Via my own social network, I have access to and friendly relationships with a chiropractor who has never been vaccinated and is opposed to

new mothers. All agreed to participate in discussions with me to discuss findings, themes, and ask for their insight and experience. In practice, interviews with the new parents and the

midwife were the most necessary to check my interpretation and gain subject matter expertise. 2.10.2 Researcher as instrument

Holloway and Biley (2011) assert, “The self is always present” (p. 971), implicitly or

explicitly in fieldwork. In qualitative research it may be more so, thus more necessary to directly

assess one’s own standing in the work and how that can shape one’s interpretation. While I am

fond of children, I do not have my own and could not draw on personal experiences of child- rearing and maternity (though this same lack also meant my own experiences could not bias

me). However, if I have children I have every intention of adhering to the CDC’s vaccination

schedule. I am able to separate my perspectives on how I view the decision not to vaccinate as a researcher and as a member of society.

When I first began to study parents who choose not to vaccinate, it was from a place of consternation. I had numerous assumptions; that the scientific evidence was crystal clear, that all of these parents were listening to Jenny McCarthy, and so on. Quickly, I saw the complexity of the issue and the numerous segments who had been coalesced into one group. I also was repeatedly exposed to my own assumptions in the literature and in media about the subject and began to see how they exacerbated my misreading of the phenomenon which contributed to my misunderstanding, false conflations and oversimplifications. While I can now assert I view the phenomenon as considerably more layered and complicated, the science as science, rather than delivered with the ten commandments, I still must recognize my own views and how they shape my interpretation. Despite or because of everything I have read and studied, I still believe

choosing to vaccinate is the right decision for virtually every child. In fact, studying it has intensified this belief.

Considering how my own views have evolved has shaped this research design. After working on my comprehensive exams for several months I concluded that I believed even more firmly in vaccination, but that I now had different language for it and could articulate why in a much richer way. Surprisingly to myself, the science became supporting evidence and

vaccination became a way to operationalize one’s values. As I began to see vaccination as a

choice made to align with values (for some, not for all), I wondered how it fit into everyday life, particularly as it is not a normative choice and can involve stigma, though the values-aspect likely imbues the parent with much conviction.

I was limited in certain ways that shaped my interpretation, but I am and was able to empathize with making a decision that is stigmatized for reasons the decider feels are unfair and wrong. I did not think Mama Natural and I make many of the same choices, but I thought we made our choices in similar ways. Also, while some of her behaviors are not the choices I make, many are choices my friends and family have made. At a reductive level, this research will be conducted by a pro-vaccine woman who is not a parent studying a woman who is a parent who has not vaccinated her children. The limitations were obvious, but also less limiting than they appeared.