DOI: 10.1016/s1057-6290(08)10005-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Selling the ideal birth: Rationalization and re-enchantment in the marketing of maternity care

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Second, in this context women's pragmatism regarding birth goes hand in hand with neoliberal uses of medicine under the logic of choice or purchase, rather than a logic of care (Mol 2008), highlighting the multiple subjectivities—the patient–consumer, attendant–provider—at stake (Rutherford and Gallo‐Cruz 2008:93). Women escaping (resisting) mistreatment by the public health system privilege the aesthetics of a nice place for birth and the upwardly mobile trespassing of class boundaries that achieving that “nice place” entails, trusting the rest to the experts.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Second, in this context women's pragmatism regarding birth goes hand in hand with neoliberal uses of medicine under the logic of choice or purchase, rather than a logic of care (Mol 2008), highlighting the multiple subjectivities—the patient–consumer, attendant–provider—at stake (Rutherford and Gallo‐Cruz 2008:93). Women escaping (resisting) mistreatment by the public health system privilege the aesthetics of a nice place for birth and the upwardly mobile trespassing of class boundaries that achieving that “nice place” entails, trusting the rest to the experts.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Market logic has infiltrated domains once considered “neutral territory” for new mothers, including the medical context (Davies, Dobscha, et al, 2010). In this scenario, one can observe phenomena like the natural birth movement shaping the contemporary advertising of mainstream maternity services in the USA, which aims to “sell the ideal birth” (Rutherford & Gallo‐Cruz, 2008), or the humanized childbirth movement in Brazil, organized by mothers and pregnant women, challenging the C‐sections market (Abdalla, 2019).…”
Section: Agenda For Future Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Feminist critics relate this occlusion to the Judeo-Christian construction of birth as a private, morally uncomfortable event that is repulsive to civilized men, and deservedly painful to women (Tyler, 2011; Tyler and Baraitser, 2013). Until taken over by doctors (Michaels, 2018; Rutherford and Gallo-Cruz, 2008), labor, birth, and postpartum moments were invisible to men – and culture – as they were handled by midwives behind the scenes. Yet the medicalization of birth from the 18th century onward – namely, the introduction of men into the delivery process – did not render birth visible either.…”
Section: Birth Imagerymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These pioneering, sporadic initiatives are joined in recent years by a host of popular representations of birth, both in women’s blogs, social media, and YouTube accounts (Longhurst, 2009; Tiidenberg and Baym, 2017; Tyler and Baraitser, 2013) and in birthing advertising and reality programs (Morris and McInerney, 2010; Rutherford and Gallo-Cruz, 2008; VandeVusse and VandeVusse, 2008). Analyses of these images suggest that despite their unprecedented proliferation, they do not challenge the hegemony of the medical perspective on birth (De Benedictis et al, 2019).…”
Section: Birth Imagerymentioning
confidence: 99%