Medicalization, Natural Childbirth and Birthing Experiences

Abstract

Although much of the early sociological and feminist analysis of medicalization focused on reproductive issues and childbirth, attention has moved away from this topic over time as new conditions have become subject to the medicalization process. At the same time, one of the major concepts within this analytical framework, the dichotomy of ‘natural’ versus ‘medical’, has not been sufficiently problematized. In this article, we call for a renewed examination of the medicalization of childbirth from a critical perspective that neither takes for granted the meaning of this dichotomy, nor presupposes feminist perspectives or those of privileged groups of women. We revisit sociological frameworks and feminist critiques of medicalization, specifically around childbirth, and review scholarship that addresses their limitations. We propose a research agenda that goes beyond the traditional assumptions about ‘natural’ and ‘medical’ childbirth and examines more closely how medicalization processes both shape and conflict with women's subjective experiences of childbirth.

Childbirth traditions and cultural perceptions of safety in Nepal: Critical spaces to ensure the survival of mothers and newborns in remote mountain villages

“…Medically, this seclusion of women in the cowshed during and after birth is considered as creating risks of infection leading to higher mortality (Thapa et al, 2001). Contrastingly, researchers have argued that women should not be separated from their cultural settings during pregnancy and childbirth (Brubaker and Dillaway, 2009;Cindoglu and Sayan-Cengiz, 2010;Kontos, 2011;Lee et al, 2012;Hall et al, 2012) and tradition should be embedded within medical care (Eckermann, 2006;Rice et al, 1994). Women in rural Nepal prefer to birth in their community setting to maintain their cultural safety (Thapa et al, 2001;Bennett et al, 2008) and women in diverse societies act differently to enhance childbirth safety (Miller and Shriver, 2012).…”

Desde la clínica de fertilidad: alianzas reproductivas, madres jubileas y bebés probeta / From the fertility clinic: reproductive alliances, jubilee mothers and test tube babies

“…Se ha escrito mucho sobre la medicalización de la reproducción humana, sobre cómo en el último siglo el razonamiento y la práctica médica se han ido apropiando de la gestación (por citar solo algunos nombres, Barker, 1998;Rúdólfsdóttir, 2000;Parry, 2006), del parto (Oakley, 1984;Rothman, 1991;Zwelling, 2008;Brubaker y Dillaway, 2009) y de los primeros cuidados del recién nacido (Wallace y Chason, 2007). Si bien se entiende que el control del embarazo y del parto ha supuesto un cambio revolucionario en la forma de vida humana que es fundamental para comprender el mundo contemporáneo (Boltanski, 2004), en general también se suele criticar la patologización excesiva de la reproducción, así como el sometimiento de las mujeres gestantes al dictado de los protocolos de la clínica con relación al modo adecuado de traer bebés al mundo.…”

Women׳s views on partnership working with midwives during pregnancy and childbirth

“…2009, p . 36) However, birth that takes place at home or in a birth centre is more natural, and in this context women are in control, which supports the normal physiological process of childbirth (Brubaker et al,. 2009).…”

“…Weitz et al (1985) found that over the five years of licensure midwives moved from a social model of midwifery care to adopting elements of medicalisation because of fear of censure, changes in expectation of clients and the impact of increased perception of risk associated with childbirth. Van Teijilingen (2005) argued that medicalisation is a process of social change, in which both women and midwives are immersed in a culture that perceives childbirth as inherently risky, thereby needing medical supervision (Brubaker et al, 2009). This may provide some explanation for the change in behaviour of lay midwives.…”