Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
This article examines the framing of choice, risk and pronatalism in Singapore's debate on elective egg freezing, beginning from the government's review of the ban in 2012 and ending in 2023 when the procedure was legalised. It demonstrates the possibility of reconciling liberal discourses on reproductive choice with technocritical discourses on egg freezing as a risky and oppressive pronatalist technology. While medical complications, false hope and commercial abuse were longstanding concerns in Singapore, these risks were perceived as reconcilable with choice through an age limit, mandatory counselling and comparative frames from the national and international regulatory context. Additionally, low fertility rates and efforts to advance gender equality enabled the reconciliation of choice and pronatalism as policy justifications, while the construction of female candidates' heteronormative reproductive desire framed pronatalism in women-centric ways. Such reconciliation was facilitated by Singapore's strong interventionist culture which normalises paternalism and pronatalism. Within this context and through actors' articulation of policy ideas, elective egg freezing was reinterpreted as a technology with manageable risks, and a hope technology for women and nation. A moral Singapore State which permits elective egg freezing while supporting the interests of women and society was thus co-produced by politicians, journalists and doctors.
G. Lee (Sat,) studied this question.