The Medicalization of Birth and Midwifery as Resistance

Shaw, Jessica

doi:10.1080/07399332.2012.736569

Cited by 47 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These findings are in contradiction with the statement that medicalization of childbirth has gone too far, which arises from different angles [28-33]. Our study showed that adding RM devices to standard prenatal care does not mean an increase of total amount of echo’s, CTG’s or other prenatal consultations.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Remote Monitoring of Hypertension Diseases in Pregnancy: A Pilot Study

Lanssens¹,

Vandenberk²,

Smeets³

et al. 2017

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundAlthough remote monitoring (RM) has proven its added value in various health care domains, little is known about the remote follow-up of pregnant women diagnosed with a gestational hypertensive disorders (GHD).ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the added value of a remote follow-up program for pregnant women diagnosed with GHD.MethodsA 1-year retrospective study was performed in the outpatient clinic of a 2nd level prenatal center where pregnant women with GHD received RM or conventional care (CC). Primary study endpoints include number of prenatal visits and admissions to the prenatal observation ward. Secondary outcomes include gestational outcome, mode of delivery, neonatal outcome, and admission to neonatal intensive care (NIC). Differences in continuous and categorical variables in maternal demographics and characteristics were tested using Unpaired Student’s two sampled t test or Mann-Whitney U test and the chi-square test. Both a univariate and multivariate analysis were performed for analyzing prenatal follow-up and gestational outcomes. All statistical analyses were done at nominal level, Cronbach alpha=.05.ResultsOf the 166 patients diagnosed with GHD, 53 received RM and 113 CC. After excluding 5 patients in the RM group and 15 in the CC group because of the missing data, 48 patients in RM group and 98 in CC group were taken into final analysis. The RM group had more women diagnosed with gestational hypertension, but less with preeclampsia when compared with CC (81.25% vs 42.86% and 14.58% vs 43.87%). Compared with CC, univariate analysis in RM showed less induction, more spontaneous labors, and less maternal and neonatal hospitalizations (48.98% vs 25.00%; 31.63% vs 60.42%; 74.49% vs 56.25%; and 27.55% vs 10.42%). This was also true in multivariate analysis, except for hospitalizations.ConclusionsAn RM follow-up of women with GHD is a promising tool in the prenatal care. It opens the perspectives to reverse the current evolution of antenatal interventions leading to more interventions and as such to ever increasing medicalized antenatal care.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Remote Monitoring of Hypertension Diseases in Pregnancy: A Pilot Study

Lanssens¹,

Vandenberk²,

Smeets³

et al. 2017

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Medical obstetric interventions are essential in cases of medically complicated births, to save the health and lives of women and newborns. On the other hand, the process of medicalization and unnecessary medical interventions may hinder the empowerment of women with medically uncomplicated low‐risk pregnancies to give birth in a way that they prefer and feel is right for them (Shaw, 2013). Leading organizations have raised the importance of promoting natural physiologic births and low‐interventional approaches (Joint Policy Statement, 2008; Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, Royal College of Midwives, Royal College of Anaesthetists, & Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, 2007; The American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists, 2019), illustrating the importance to empower and support women to give birth.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is known that pregnant women desire preparatory information before birth (Ghiasi, 2019; Hunter et al, 2017) and that many search for supplemental web‐based information about pregnancy‐related topics (Sayakhot & Carolan‐Olah, 2016). It is argued in the literature that pregnant women are not presented with choices that imply actual control over how to give birth (Shaw, 2013), raising questions about how preparatory information is provided about different modes of birth, such as waterbirth. If women are left without sufficient information about waterbirth as an alternative way to give birth, or are left alone trying to search for information, they may not reach informed and well‐grounded decisions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Waterbirth in low‐risk pregnancy: An exploration of women’s experiences

Carlsson

Ulfsdottir

2020

Journal of Advanced Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims To explore retrospective descriptions about benefits, negative experiences and preparatory information related to waterbirths. Design A qualitative study. Methods Women who gave birth in water with healthy pregnancies and low‐risk births were consecutively recruited between December 2015–October 2018 from two birthing units in Sweden. All who gave birth in water during the recruitment period were included (N = 155) and 111 responded to the survey. Women were emailed a web‐based survey six weeks postpartum. Open‐ended questions were analysed with qualitative content analysis. Results Two themes were identified related to benefits: (a) physical benefits: the water eases labour progression while offering buoyancy and pain relief; and (b) psychological benefits: improved relaxation and control in a demedicalized and safe setting. Two themes were identified related to negative experiences: (a) equipment‐related issues due to the construction of the tub and issues related to being immersed in water; and (b) fears and worries related to waterbirth. In regard to preparatory information, respondents reported a lack of general and specific information related to waterbirths, even after they contacted birthing units to ask questions. Supplemental web‐based information was sought, but the trustworthiness of these sources was questioned and a need for trustworthy web‐based information was articulated. Conclusion Women who give birth in water experience physical and psychological benefits, but need better equipment and sufficient information. There is room for improvement with regard to prenatal and intrapartum care of women who give birth in water. Impact Judging from women's recounts, midwives and nurses should continue advocating waterbirth in low‐risk pregnancies. The lack of adequate equipment in Swedish birthing units articulated by women challenge current routines and resources. The findings illustrate unfulfilled needs for preparatory information about waterbirth, further strengthening that midwives should discuss the possibility of waterbirth when meeting expectant parents in the antenatal setting.

show abstract

“…This is associated with an increased use of scheduled inductions, epidural analgesia, augmentation of labour and caesarean sections (Walker et al, 2009;Shaw, 2013;Lothian, 2014). The World Health Organization (WHO, 1996) emphasises that there should be a valid reason for interfering with the natural process of childbirth.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The care for normal pregnancy and birth should be de-medicalized, which means changing maternity care and ensuring that inappropriate interventions are not used (WHO, 1998). Unnecessary medical interventions during labour and birth may compromise the safety and emotional well-being of both the mother and baby (Shaw, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%