Who is afraid of obstetric violence? / Quem tem medo da violência obstétrica?

Abstract Despite being a relatively new term, obstetric violence is an old problem. In 2014, the World Health Organization declared: "Many women experience disrespectful and abusive treatment during childbirth in facilities worldwide. Such treatment not only violates the rights of women to respectful care, but can also threaten their rights to life, health, bodily integrity, and freedom from discrimination". This problem, named as "abuse", "disrespect" and/or "mistreatment" during childbirth, has been addressed in several studies. However, there has been no consensus on how to properly name this problem, although its typology has been well described. Considering the magnitude of this problem, it is essential to give the correct terminology to this important health and human rights issue. Naming it as obstetric violence and understanding it as gender-based violence will ensure appropriate interventions to avert this violation of women's rights.

Resumo Apesar de ser um termo relativamente novo, a violência obstétrica é um problema antigo. Em 2014, a Organização Mundial da Saúde declarou: "Muitas mulheres sofrem tratamento desrespeitoso e abusivo durante o parto em instalações de saúde em todo o mundo. Esse tratamento não só viola os direitos das mulheres a cuidados respeitosos, mas também pode ameaçar seus direitos à vida, saúde, integridade corporal e liberdade de discriminação". Esse problema, denominado "abuso", "desrespeito" e /ou "maus-tratos" durante o parto, foi abordado em vários estudos. No entanto, não houve consenso sobre como nomear adequadamente esse problema, embora sua tipologia tenha sido bem descrita. Considerando a magnitude desse problema, é essencial dar a terminologia correta para essa importante questão de saúde e direitos humanos. Nomear como violência obstétrica e entendê-la como violência baseada em gênero garantirá intervenções apropriadas para evitar essa violação dos direitos das mulheres.

The misleading choice for safer births in Brazilian's most developed region: a cross-sectional study.

PURPOSE: To analyze the Cesarean Section (CS) rate in Brazilian women according to category of health insurance and individual characteristics associated with the mode of delivery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study was performed in three maternity services (one public tertiary referral center, one maternity service for both public and private care, and one private maternity service) in Campinas city, Brazil. Eligibility criteria were: inpatient during the immediate postpartum period, hospital birth, single pregnancy, and live newborn. Sociodemographic and anthropometric data, reproductive history, pregnancy planning, and prenatal care information was obtained from participants. Comorbidities, type of birth, and newborn data were collected from medical records. The mode of delivery was categorized as either CS or vaginal delivery. RESULTS: A total of 1276 women were included in this study. The overall CS rate was 57.5%. CS rates were 41.6, 54.8, and 90.1% for public, mixed (public and private), and private maternity services, respectively. Mean age was higher in women who had a CS (28.0 ± 6.0 years versus 25.9 ± 6.5 years, p < .0001) as was the mean Body Mass Index (25.2 ± 5.3 kg/m2 versus 23.8 ± 4.5 kg/m2, p < .0001). CS was related to higher education, employment, white skin color, planned pregnancy, antenatal care in a private service, and primiparity. CONCLUSIONS: The overall CS rate was high (greater than 50%); in the private service, almost all participants had a CS delivery (90.1%). Better socioeconomic conditions and primiparity were associated with higher CS rates in Brazil. Political pressure for the management of unnecessary CSs is vital in Brazil. Together with the provision of real incentives for normal deliveries in public and, most importantly, private services.