ABSTRACT
As two academics researching in the area of maternal health, we are increasingly concerned with what we see as a positivist turn in midwifery research. In this paper, we examine this idea of the quantification of midwifery research, using as an example the current esteem given to the systematic literature review, and its creep into other methodologies. We argue that the current favor toward quantitative research and expertise in midwifery academia risks the future of midwifery research by the lack of equal development of qualitative experts, diluting qualitative research rigor within the profession, and limiting the kinds of questions asked. We identify the similarity between the current prominence of quantitative research and medical dominance in midwifery and maintain that it is of vital importance to the profession (research and practice) that the proper attention, contemplation, and merit are given to qualitative research methods.
Subject(s)
Midwifery , Female , Humans , Midwifery/methods , Pregnancy , Qualitative Research , Research DesignABSTRACT
The general discourse in most countries is that technological surveillance during pregnancy and childbirth is synonymous with safety, while women's individual experiences are less likely regarded as critical. The aim of this ethnographic study at a birth center in Germany was to describe how midwives and their clients construct risk and safety. The data collection methods included participant observation and semi-structured interviews. 'Putting the baby back in the body' was the major theme that emerged, supported by three sub-themes. The women in this study relied on scans at the beginning of pregnancy to make their baby real to them, but became more confident in their capacity to sense their baby after experiencing the first fetal movements. The midwives fostered this confidence by using interactive palpation of the abdomen with the women, thus supporting their individual sensory experience, and, in the midwives' view, enhancing overall safety during pregnancy and at birth.
Subject(s)
Birthing Centers , Midwifery , Delivery, Obstetric , Female , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Parturition , Pregnancy , Qualitative ResearchSubject(s)
Disclosure , Ethics, Medical , Gender Identity , Parents , Prenatal Diagnosis/ethics , Technology/ethics , Female , Humans , Male , PregnancySubject(s)
Decision Making/ethics , Disabled Children , Eugenics , Prenatal Diagnosis/ethics , Child , Disabled Persons , Female , Humans , PregnancySubject(s)
Cesarean Section/ethics , Cesarean Section/statistics & numerical data , Choice Behavior/ethics , Defensive Medicine/ethics , Labor, Obstetric , Moral Obligations , Mothers , Obstetrics/ethics , Patient Rights/ethics , Personal Autonomy , Physician-Patient Relations/ethics , Female , Humans , PregnancyABSTRACT
This paper identifies how the different ideologies of patriarchy, technology, capitalism, race and feminism shape how we see breastfeeding and the breastfeeding mother with child. Ultimately, while we can make good strong arguments for breastfeeding from the perspective of health, of outcome, of good scientific data, we need to appreciate that they are only rationalizations for a shared belief that the image of the breastfeeding woman with baby represents something precious and valuable. So while it may be important to make arguments that draw on what is valued in society, we need to think hard about what it is that we value so that as we move forward with our efforts to make breastfeeding safe, we can use but not be used by, the various ideologies or claims.
Subject(s)
Child Abuse/prevention & control , Child Health Services/organization & administration , Delivery of Health Care/organization & administration , Social Problems , Adolescent , Child , Child Abuse, Sexual/prevention & control , Child Advocacy , Child Health Services/trends , Child Welfare , Child, Preschool , Delivery of Health Care/trends , Europe , Female , Health Status , Humans , Male , Mandatory Reporting , Poverty , Punishment , Stress, Psychological/complications , United StatesSubject(s)
Sex Preselection/psychology , Birth Order , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Preimplantation Diagnosis , Sex Preselection/ethics , Sex Ratio , Social Change , United StatesSubject(s)
Genetic Testing , Human Genome Project , Prenatal Diagnosis , Social Dominance , Sociology , Women's Rights , Biology , DNA Fingerprinting , Ethics , Family Relations , Female , Genetic Engineering , Genetic Predisposition to Disease , Genetics , Humans , Men , Occupational Exposure , Social Sciences , Sociobiology , Wedge Argument , WomenABSTRACT
This paper examines the ways in which prenatal diagnosis changes women's experiences of pregnancy. The paper explores the role of patriarchal ideology in the development and use of prenatal diagnostic technology.
Subject(s)
Abortion, Induced/psychology , Attitude , Pregnancy , Pregnant Women , Prenatal Diagnosis/psychology , Social Change , Abortion, Eugenic , Coercion , Decision Making , Down Syndrome , Female , Fetal Diseases/diagnosis , Genetic Diseases, Inborn/diagnosis , Genetic Predisposition to Disease , Humans , Maternal-Fetal Relations , Men , Psychology , Self Concept , Sex Determination Analysis , WomenSubject(s)
Fathers , Feminism , Reproductive Techniques, Assisted , Social Dominance , Surrogate Mothers , Women's Rights , Cultural Diversity , Female , Humans , Incest , Infertility , Marriage , Mothers , Parent-Child Relations , Pregnancy , Pregnant Women , Religion , Social Values , Socioeconomic Factors , WomenABSTRACT
Embryo diagnosis also has costs in life and in liberty -- that of the women on whose bodies these experiments are done. While the proven deaths to date from IVF-related treatments are quite small, the long-term risks are not yet in. And the costs of pain, illness, and physical and emotional suffering from these procedures go largely unremarked....IVF and embryo retrieval procedures do not take place on a couple's body -- it is a woman on the table, a woman who bears the costs of this treatment.
