Balancing risk, intimacy and (non)compliance

A qualitative study of sex across household during Covid-19 social restrictions

Bibliographic Data

ID15098296
AuthorsKaren Maxwell (0000-0002-2264-6510, MRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK, corresponding author), Raquel Bosó Pérez (0000-0001-7342-4566, MRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK), David Reid (0000-0002-8743-2070, University College London), Lily Freeman (0009-0009-0364-856X, University College London), Dee Menezes (0000-0002-1628-1228, University College London), Pam Sonnenberg (0000-0002-1067-1583, University College London), Nigel Field (0000-0002-2825-6652, University College London), Kirstin R Mitchell (0000-0002-4409-6601, MRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK)
Year2023
Volume25
Issue5
Pages582-598
Publication date2023-05-02
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueCulture Health & Sexuality (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1369-1058 • E-ISSN: 1464-5351
PublisherInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/13691058.2022.2078507
PMID35674048
OpenAlexW4281678175
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited22

Government controls over intimate relationships, imposed to limit the spread of Sars-CoV-2, were unprecedented in modern times. This study draws on data from qualitative interviews with 18 participants in Natsal-COVID, a quasi-representative web-panel survey of the British population ( n = 6,654 people), reporting that they had sex with someone from outside their household in the preceding four weeks; a period in which contact between households was restricted in the UK. Whilst only 10% of people reported sexual contact outside their household, among single people and those in non-cohabiting relationships, rates were much higher (Natsal-COVID). Our findings show that individuals did not take decisions to meet up with sexual partners lightly. Participants were motivated by needs-for connection, security, intimacy and a sense of normality. People balanced risks-of catching COVID-19, social judgement and punishment for rule-breaking-against other perceived risks, including to their mental health or relationships. We used situated rationality and social action theories of risk to demonstrate that people weighed up risk in socially situated ways and exhibited complex decision-making when deciding not to comply with restrictions. Understanding motivations for non-compliance is crucial to informing future public health messaging which accounts for the needs and circumstances of all population members

2019-20 coronavirus outbreak · Compliance (psychology · Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19 · Qualitative research · Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2 · Social science · Sociology · Demography · Employment and Welfare Studies · Medicine · Psychology · Social Psychology · Work-Family Balance Challenges · Youth Education and Societal Dynamics · Virology

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access