Search

Abstract Parents who seek weight loss treatment for their children find themselves pulled between double moral burdens. Blamed and shamed for the weight itself while culpable for the psychological effects of encouraging weight loss, parental stigma comes from multiple directions. Through interviews with parents who send their children to weight loss camps (N = 47), we ask: how do parents maintain a moral sense of self? We show that parents distribute moral blame for their children's weight and disavow moral blame for encouraging weight loss. We further interrogate how parents' own weight status informs moral management strategies. We find parents' bodies and biographies affect the ways distribution and disavowal take form. Parents with self-identified weight problems internalize significant self-blame for children's weight gain, while parents without personal weight problems more freely allocate blame to outside actors and factors. However, when disavowing the effects of encouraging weight loss, parents with current or past weight issues rely on a shared experience that is unavailable to their slender counterparts. Our findings elucidate the moral tensions of parents who embark on weight loss intervention for their children while highlighting the interplay between primary and associative moral stigma in a family context. Highlights • Parents who seek weight loss treatment for their children face double moral burdens. • Parents distribute blame for children's high body weight. • Parents disavow blame for psychological harm from weight loss intervention. • Parents' weight status affects how they manage moral stigma. • Shared stigma between parent and child is both a liability and an asset. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For parents of children with disabilities, stigmatization is part of everyday life. To resist the negative social and emotional consequences of stigma, parents both challenge and deflect social devaluations. Challenges work to upend the stigmatizing structure, while deflections maintain the interaction order. We examine how parents of children with disabilities deploy deflections and challenges, and how their stigma resistance strategies combine with available models of disability discourse. Disability discourse falls into two broad categories: medical and social . The medical model emphasizes diagnostic labels and treats impairment as an individual deficit, while the social model centralizes unaccommodating social structures. The social model's activist underpinnings make it a logical frame for parents to use as they challenge disability stigma. In turn, the medical model's focus on individual “improvement” seems to most closely align with stigma deflections. However, the relationship between stigma resistance strategies and models of disability is an empirical question not yet addressed in the literature. In this study, we examine 117 instances of stigmatization from 40 interviews with 43 parents, and document how parents respond. We find that challenges and deflections do not map cleanly onto the social or medical models. Rather, parents invoke medical and social meanings in ways that serve diverse ends, sometimes centralizing a medical label to challenge stigma, and sometimes recognizing disabling social structures, but deflecting stigma nonetheless. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]