In 1975, American sociologist Gelles first indicated a possible statistical connection between pregnancy and a rise in domestic violence: according to him, pregnant women are at higher risk of experiencing violence by their partner. Since then, numerous research has followed that hypothesis, articulated statistical correlations between pregnancy and violence, and argued for better prevention. In the US and in Europe, researchers and political activists have called for better protection against violence for pregnant women. Other publications, however, including publications by Gelles himself, have questioned the methodological robustness of such research, leading to questions about the very existence of a causal link between pregnancy and domestic violence. How can we understand such profound disagreements? And how have these controversies been translated at the local level of policy implementation?
In this Paper, I propose to explore how domestic violence during pregnancy emerged as a problem in a local setting. I will draw on ethnographic research in a Swiss pregnancy counselling unit that offers free psychosocial support to pregnant women. In the 2010s, the unit sought to improve its ability to detect domestic violence victims among pregnant women by implementing systematic screening. By exploring how the problem was constructed in this setting, I will show how scientific uncertainties are transformed into certain danger. Controversies are set aside in favor of the precautionary principle. I will argue that this reinforces the figure of pregnant women as vulnerable subjects in need of protection by the state.
With this contribution, I also wish to highlight the relevance of ethnography to policy analysis and the construction of social problems. Exploring the micro-level of interactions allows for an assessment of which problem constructions have a direct impact on pregnant women.
