To protege and mentor,
Thank you for the feedback. I am glad you enjoyed reading my paper. I agree with the criticism that my paper lacked adequate sources. Adding more sources would have definitely improved my paper significantly. I also think a better foundation(outline, etc.) would allow me to be more organized in my thoughts: thus, allowing me to write a much clearer paper while being more concise and more detailed in my explanations. I believe all the ideas were here but they needed to be expanded in a more organized way. Thank you for the criticism and positive feedback. Much appreciated
Thursday, April 14, 2011
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
hw 44
Comments FROM others
Mentor:
Omar,
your project was very interesting. You touched on many important points and your analysis of the situation was very in-depth. However, if you were to expand on all the points argued your paper would be much stronger. Using more sources and including more data would also help strengthen the paper. Overall, a good start and can easily become a very good paper with some additions.
"Protege":
Omar,
I liked how you took something that is already a topic that people don't talk about much and went deeper into it. You talked about why things were happening the way they were. My favorite part was were you talked about the cycles in hospitals and how the lead to c-sections. Its crazy how things work. If you made the paper longer it probably would have been better because it looks like you can write a lot about that specific topic. Good job.
Comments FOR others
Arden,
You did a very good job of explaining your entire topic. You started off with a very strong intro which was clear, concise, and showed significance. In fact my favorite line was from the intro, where you clearly summed up the basis of your paper: "Although we have come a very long way in the physiological understanding of both pregnancy and childbirth, there are still many lingering myths and common misconceptions about them in our society." You did a very good job explaining and then disproving many common misconceptions. Constructively, if you were to expand certain sections of your paper in which a deeper explanation or analysis would benefit the readers idea of maybe why these misconceptions exist would bring your paper to the next level. good job though
Tamiko,
your paper was very good, specifically the analysis of the birthing situation. It was obvious you understood the situation of misconceptions on a basic level. What made your paper good was that you showed a true analysis of the situation; Thus, bringing your basic knowledge of the situation to much deeper more sophisticated level. You do a very good job of explaining how the alternatives for birth are limited and what the incentives are for this. However, in terms of making your paper better cutting down on repetitiveness as well as better word choice in certain sentence would greatly strengthen your paper. In addition expanding on your idea would make for better expression of your ideas(obviously that can be said about practically everyones paper). Overall, good job
Devin,
Great project. I like that you focused in on a very specific and unexplored(at least in our class) topic. You did a very good job of clearly stating what you were studying. You then do a good job of laying out the common practice and then critiquing them using statistical data and other facts from credible sources. It shows the misconception in even something so simple as when to cut the umbilical cord. It is projects such as these that make us question the system we live under. great job.
Mentor:
Omar,
your project was very interesting. You touched on many important points and your analysis of the situation was very in-depth. However, if you were to expand on all the points argued your paper would be much stronger. Using more sources and including more data would also help strengthen the paper. Overall, a good start and can easily become a very good paper with some additions.
"Protege":
Omar,
I liked how you took something that is already a topic that people don't talk about much and went deeper into it. You talked about why things were happening the way they were. My favorite part was were you talked about the cycles in hospitals and how the lead to c-sections. Its crazy how things work. If you made the paper longer it probably would have been better because it looks like you can write a lot about that specific topic. Good job.
Comments FOR others
Arden,
You did a very good job of explaining your entire topic. You started off with a very strong intro which was clear, concise, and showed significance. In fact my favorite line was from the intro, where you clearly summed up the basis of your paper: "Although we have come a very long way in the physiological understanding of both pregnancy and childbirth, there are still many lingering myths and common misconceptions about them in our society." You did a very good job explaining and then disproving many common misconceptions. Constructively, if you were to expand certain sections of your paper in which a deeper explanation or analysis would benefit the readers idea of maybe why these misconceptions exist would bring your paper to the next level. good job though
Tamiko,
your paper was very good, specifically the analysis of the birthing situation. It was obvious you understood the situation of misconceptions on a basic level. What made your paper good was that you showed a true analysis of the situation; Thus, bringing your basic knowledge of the situation to much deeper more sophisticated level. You do a very good job of explaining how the alternatives for birth are limited and what the incentives are for this. However, in terms of making your paper better cutting down on repetitiveness as well as better word choice in certain sentence would greatly strengthen your paper. In addition expanding on your idea would make for better expression of your ideas(obviously that can be said about practically everyones paper). Overall, good job
Devin,
Great project. I like that you focused in on a very specific and unexplored(at least in our class) topic. You did a very good job of clearly stating what you were studying. You then do a good job of laying out the common practice and then critiquing them using statistical data and other facts from credible sources. It shows the misconception in even something so simple as when to cut the umbilical cord. It is projects such as these that make us question the system we live under. great job.
Wednesday, April 6, 2011
42
ACOG is acronym for the American Congress of Obstetricians and gynecologists. ACOG is an organization comprised of obstetricians and gynecologist who have completed a two part exam and then are nominated by existing members. ACOG states on their website that they are a "private, voluntary, nonprofit membership organization." (http://www.acog.org/from_home/acoginfo.cfm, about ACOG, 2011) Although they are a nonprofit organization the "recommendations" they make imply that profit is indeed their motive. ACOG is known to make medical recommendations regarding child birth, including both pre and post natal care. As Marsden Wagner covers in his book "Born in the USA" many of the recommendation made by ACOG are made to benefit Obstetricians and many recommendations are made although they lack sufficient evidence or statistical power. It is not much of a surprise that ACOG favors ob/gyn’s since that is what the organization is comprised of. Because they have such a monopoly over the world of child birth they have the ability to control many ob/gyn’s and how they practice. Not to mention the schooling required to become an obstetrician teaches one to become a specialized surgeon. This obviously implies that birth is not a natural state but rather a medical disease issue in need of curing. This is the mindset that has turned our child birth system in to what it is. With C-section rates in New York at over 30 percent it is obvious that those in power have implemented a system and way of thinking in which birth has become a medical issue rather than a natural occurrence. ACOG is in support of the current system and is opposed to the idea of home births and midwifery. Although, it is obvious that ACOG’s purpose is to help women deliver children their methods have become corrupt, are inefficient, and are causing many of the issue people seek to get away from.
Cesarean sections have been climbing at an alarming rate with some New York City hospitals with rates over 70 percent. So why is it that cesareans have become more popular. Simply enough it is the most convenient form of childbirth, for the obstetrician. Rather than letting birth take its natural course which can take a varying amount of hours and many times requires care into late nights and early mornings, it is easier to simply perform a surgery and be done with the birth. As explained very well in the documentary “The Business of Being Born” many of the reasons and problems that arise which lead to the necessity of a C-section is caused by the obstetricians and hospital staff themselves. It is very common for the drug Pitocin to be used to help induce labor when a woman is not dilating fast enough to fit the hospital staff’s wants. This is not surprising given the environment of a hospital, having a doctor or nurse yell at you to push or control your birth does not allow for much relaxation which is of course necessary in having a smooth, quicker delivery. Because the Pitocin causes the women to go into labor and have more rapid and extreme contractions a pain killer is usually needed to alleviate the pain. The most common form is an epidural which basically numbs the woman from waist down so she does not feel the pain of the fake induction. The epidural however slows down the contractions which then lead to the need of more Pitocin. However, once too much Pitocin is used and the contractions become too rapid and extreme the baby access to oxygen becomes compromised in which the doctors then deem it necessary to have a C-section. While the doctors feel heroic and have the mothers believe they “saved” her baby, many times they are the ones who cause the complication to begin with. This is not to say all C-sections are a result of this or all obstetricians practice in such a way. However, as seen in the documentary this is not in any way uncommon. One of the most moving scenes is in a hospital, in which a chart is showing of all women in labor. Practically all their names are marked with three letters “Pit”, which of course stands for Pitocin. It is quite unlikely that all these women could not induce the child naturally so one is almost forced to come to the conclusion that the impatience and insensitivity of the hospital staff is leading to much unnecessary complications.
ACOG being comprised of obstetricians obviously supports hospital child birth. One of the most effective and common tactics they use in persuading mothers is fear. As they state in one of their recommendations “Women inquiring about planned home birth should be informed of its risks and benefits based on recent evidence. Specifically, they should be informed that although the absolute risk may be low, planned home birth is associated with a twofold to threefold increased risk of neonatal death when compared with planned hospital birth.” (The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Issues Opinion on Planned Home Births, January 2011) Although they say they respect a woman’s choice they use scare tactics to influence an anti-home birth mentality. In one of their other recommendations Dr. Richard Waldman is quoted saying “As physicians, we have an obligation to provide families with information about the risks, benefits, limitations and advantages concerning the different maternity care providers and birth settings.” However, the bias in the information being provided greatly benefits ob/gyn’s. The risk of midwifery and home birth becoming mainstream means fewer patients for ob/gyn’s and in turn less money. Therefore, having all recommendations made by an organization that is looking to benefit its members, which is understandable although unethical, does not truly give women a fair informed decision. ACOG is indeed a nonprofit organization but their motive is still profit. Although the profit is not for the benefit of the organization it is for the benefit of the members. Therefore, in having such a biased system it is essential that women be provided with objective information about the risk of home birth, but more importantly the risk of hospital birth.
1. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Issues Opinion
on Planned Home Births, Jan. 2011
2. (New ACOG Opinion on Home Birth Touts Rights, Nixes HBAC and CPMs, Jill Arnold, 2011, http://www.theunnecesarean.com/blog/2011/1/21/new-acog-opinion-on-home-birth-touts-rights-nixes-hbac-and-c.html)
3. C-Section Rates Continue To Climb Across City, kafi Drexel, 2008, http://www.ny1.com/content/ny1_living/health/84398/c-section-rates-continue-to-climb-across-city/
4. About ACOG, The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, 2011
Cesarean sections have been climbing at an alarming rate with some New York City hospitals with rates over 70 percent. So why is it that cesareans have become more popular. Simply enough it is the most convenient form of childbirth, for the obstetrician. Rather than letting birth take its natural course which can take a varying amount of hours and many times requires care into late nights and early mornings, it is easier to simply perform a surgery and be done with the birth. As explained very well in the documentary “The Business of Being Born” many of the reasons and problems that arise which lead to the necessity of a C-section is caused by the obstetricians and hospital staff themselves. It is very common for the drug Pitocin to be used to help induce labor when a woman is not dilating fast enough to fit the hospital staff’s wants. This is not surprising given the environment of a hospital, having a doctor or nurse yell at you to push or control your birth does not allow for much relaxation which is of course necessary in having a smooth, quicker delivery. Because the Pitocin causes the women to go into labor and have more rapid and extreme contractions a pain killer is usually needed to alleviate the pain. The most common form is an epidural which basically numbs the woman from waist down so she does not feel the pain of the fake induction. The epidural however slows down the contractions which then lead to the need of more Pitocin. However, once too much Pitocin is used and the contractions become too rapid and extreme the baby access to oxygen becomes compromised in which the doctors then deem it necessary to have a C-section. While the doctors feel heroic and have the mothers believe they “saved” her baby, many times they are the ones who cause the complication to begin with. This is not to say all C-sections are a result of this or all obstetricians practice in such a way. However, as seen in the documentary this is not in any way uncommon. One of the most moving scenes is in a hospital, in which a chart is showing of all women in labor. Practically all their names are marked with three letters “Pit”, which of course stands for Pitocin. It is quite unlikely that all these women could not induce the child naturally so one is almost forced to come to the conclusion that the impatience and insensitivity of the hospital staff is leading to much unnecessary complications.
ACOG being comprised of obstetricians obviously supports hospital child birth. One of the most effective and common tactics they use in persuading mothers is fear. As they state in one of their recommendations “Women inquiring about planned home birth should be informed of its risks and benefits based on recent evidence. Specifically, they should be informed that although the absolute risk may be low, planned home birth is associated with a twofold to threefold increased risk of neonatal death when compared with planned hospital birth.” (The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Issues Opinion on Planned Home Births, January 2011) Although they say they respect a woman’s choice they use scare tactics to influence an anti-home birth mentality. In one of their other recommendations Dr. Richard Waldman is quoted saying “As physicians, we have an obligation to provide families with information about the risks, benefits, limitations and advantages concerning the different maternity care providers and birth settings.” However, the bias in the information being provided greatly benefits ob/gyn’s. The risk of midwifery and home birth becoming mainstream means fewer patients for ob/gyn’s and in turn less money. Therefore, having all recommendations made by an organization that is looking to benefit its members, which is understandable although unethical, does not truly give women a fair informed decision. ACOG is indeed a nonprofit organization but their motive is still profit. Although the profit is not for the benefit of the organization it is for the benefit of the members. Therefore, in having such a biased system it is essential that women be provided with objective information about the risk of home birth, but more importantly the risk of hospital birth.
1. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Issues Opinion
on Planned Home Births, Jan. 2011
2. (New ACOG Opinion on Home Birth Touts Rights, Nixes HBAC and CPMs, Jill Arnold, 2011, http://www.theunnecesarean.com/blog/2011/1/21/new-acog-opinion-on-home-birth-touts-rights-nixes-hbac-and-c.html)
3. C-Section Rates Continue To Climb Across City, kafi Drexel, 2008, http://www.ny1.com/content/ny1_living/health/84398/c-section-rates-continue-to-climb-across-city/
4. About ACOG, The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, 2011
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Hw 41
(James Henderson, Hospital birth vs. Home birth: a debate on choices, 2010, http://www.babyzone.com/pregnancy/labor_birth/article/hospital-birth-home-birth-debate-pg8)
James Henderson is an advocate of midwifery. He tries to keep his opinions on the matter as objective as possible given that he is in disagreement with the opposing side. In this case the opposing side is obstetrician Dr. Jay Dileo. While Henderson does not discredit hospital birth he discredits the argument of Dileo against home births. Dr. DiLeo tries to persuade people to avoid home births by using scare tactics, something quite common amongst obstetricians. He discredits DiLeo's arguments by calling him out on not having accurate statistical evidence to support his claims as well as showing the flaws in the logic of his arguments. Henderson says it quite well in his article " On a purely intellectual level, this makes no sense whatsoever." What precedes this quote is Dr. DiLeo saying that home birth is not safe, (more anti-home birth propaganda), etc. He follows this up by saying people who chose home births are generally more educated and "knowledgeable" on the birthing process. Those statements obviously contradict each other. You would expect a more logical argument from someone who went through such extensive schooling. The lack of logical arguments is not Dr. DiLeo's fault because truthfully home birth is AT LEAST AS SAFE as a hospital birth and therefore saying it is not so is factually incorrect and arguments against is are opinion based with little statistical fact to back up the opinions.
(Marsden Wagner, Born in in The USA, 2006)
In this book Wagner argues for alternative birthing options. He starts by showing the corruption in the system that obstetricians and obstetricians soon to be go through to become professionals in their field. He points out the flaws in the system rather than making all obstetricians out to be bad. He also does not let obstetricians off the hook by pointing out how they look the other way and ignore wrong doings although they are aware of them. This book not only shows the flaws of hospitals births but brings to light the reality of alternative options (ie. birthing centers, home births, etc)
(WISCONSIN SECTION - AMERICAN COLLEGE OF OBSTETRICIANS AND GYNECOLOGISTS, Position Paper on Midwifery Licensure, 2005)
This is an article put out by ACOG on their stance on licensure for midwives. At one point in the article the talk about how much they should keep the public from making unsafe birthing choices, etc. This insinuates that home birth is unsafe even under a certified midwife. Their statistical backing for this is that in the last 4 decades infant mortality rates have decreased. I would hope so, if it was other wise regardless of the method there would be serious issues. The complete disregard models from other countries that are less expensive and much safer and effective. A very biased article but necessary in arguing and disproving the opposing side.
(Marsden Wagner, MD, MSPH, What Every Midwife Should Know About ACOG and VBAC: Critique of ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 5, July 1999, “Vaginal Birth After Previous Cesarean Section”)
Marsden Wagner discredits ACOG's recommendation to only have VBAC(vaginal birth after cesarean) in hospitals. Their recommendation has no statistical evidence and is purely opinion. This is not uncommon in ACOG recommendations. He also shows how many VBAC's performed in hospitals have led to uterine rupture due to induction drgus used such as oxytocin. He also shows how ACOG lied about the true statistics in saying no statistics showed oxytocin caused uterine rupture when in fact it did. Although this conclusion could not be drawn from the single data collection because it lacked statistical power. Therefore regardless the conclusion from the data would not be accurate enough to make a medical recommendation. This shows the true nature and incentives of ACOG's "recommendations. It is a good article to use when arguing anti-ACOG.
James Henderson is an advocate of midwifery. He tries to keep his opinions on the matter as objective as possible given that he is in disagreement with the opposing side. In this case the opposing side is obstetrician Dr. Jay Dileo. While Henderson does not discredit hospital birth he discredits the argument of Dileo against home births. Dr. DiLeo tries to persuade people to avoid home births by using scare tactics, something quite common amongst obstetricians. He discredits DiLeo's arguments by calling him out on not having accurate statistical evidence to support his claims as well as showing the flaws in the logic of his arguments. Henderson says it quite well in his article " On a purely intellectual level, this makes no sense whatsoever." What precedes this quote is Dr. DiLeo saying that home birth is not safe, (more anti-home birth propaganda), etc. He follows this up by saying people who chose home births are generally more educated and "knowledgeable" on the birthing process. Those statements obviously contradict each other. You would expect a more logical argument from someone who went through such extensive schooling. The lack of logical arguments is not Dr. DiLeo's fault because truthfully home birth is AT LEAST AS SAFE as a hospital birth and therefore saying it is not so is factually incorrect and arguments against is are opinion based with little statistical fact to back up the opinions.
(Marsden Wagner, Born in in The USA, 2006)
In this book Wagner argues for alternative birthing options. He starts by showing the corruption in the system that obstetricians and obstetricians soon to be go through to become professionals in their field. He points out the flaws in the system rather than making all obstetricians out to be bad. He also does not let obstetricians off the hook by pointing out how they look the other way and ignore wrong doings although they are aware of them. This book not only shows the flaws of hospitals births but brings to light the reality of alternative options (ie. birthing centers, home births, etc)
(WISCONSIN SECTION - AMERICAN COLLEGE OF OBSTETRICIANS AND GYNECOLOGISTS, Position Paper on Midwifery Licensure, 2005)
This is an article put out by ACOG on their stance on licensure for midwives. At one point in the article the talk about how much they should keep the public from making unsafe birthing choices, etc. This insinuates that home birth is unsafe even under a certified midwife. Their statistical backing for this is that in the last 4 decades infant mortality rates have decreased. I would hope so, if it was other wise regardless of the method there would be serious issues. The complete disregard models from other countries that are less expensive and much safer and effective. A very biased article but necessary in arguing and disproving the opposing side.
(Marsden Wagner, MD, MSPH, What Every Midwife Should Know About ACOG and VBAC: Critique of ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 5, July 1999, “Vaginal Birth After Previous Cesarean Section”)
Marsden Wagner discredits ACOG's recommendation to only have VBAC(vaginal birth after cesarean) in hospitals. Their recommendation has no statistical evidence and is purely opinion. This is not uncommon in ACOG recommendations. He also shows how many VBAC's performed in hospitals have led to uterine rupture due to induction drgus used such as oxytocin. He also shows how ACOG lied about the true statistics in saying no statistics showed oxytocin caused uterine rupture when in fact it did. Although this conclusion could not be drawn from the single data collection because it lacked statistical power. Therefore regardless the conclusion from the data would not be accurate enough to make a medical recommendation. This shows the true nature and incentives of ACOG's "recommendations. It is a good article to use when arguing anti-ACOG.
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
hw 39
In the second hundred pages of "born in the USA" by Marsden Wagner he builds on his main topic from the first hundred pages but he also explores a different method of birth delivery. Organization-wise Wagner reffered back to obestetrics practice in explaining the benefits of a midwife facilitated birth throughout the section. Although there was big focus on midwifery this section was not as exclusive to one topic as the first section was in talking about obstetrics. In comparing obstetrics to midwifery Wagner makes the essential distincition between the placement of power in the two different types of birth. The obstetricians are in control of the birth when in the hospital, he has many stories to show obstetricians using their power for their convinience. However, with midewifery the focus is more on the mother, she is in control, she in empowered and the attention and care is both for her and her child. Wagner also strengthened his arguement by showing how obstetricians use their power to manipulate patients. They often make "medical recommendations" to keep on a convinient schedule, c-section rates makes this pretty obvious, and although the patient may legally refuse the doctors instill fear in them by telling them the baby could die and it would be solely their fault; although as we have seen many of these "medical interventions" are what cause complications to the child.
Wagner also introduced alternative birthing centers. This was one of the alternatives he believed to be healthier than hospital birth, and with the nightmarish stories from hospital births he seems to be correct. In a hospital women are under almost complete control of the doctor and a lot of the birth is often done at the doctors convinience. However, birthing centers offer, baths, birthing chairsn candles, etc. In short the woman is allowed to create an enviornment she feels comfortable in. She is given control, she is more relaxed, and subsequently her birth should be relatively easier, less painful, and natural. Birth is a natural process and for 90 to 95 percent of births no surgical intervention or induction is neccesary yet this is how we treat birth. The alternatives being presented are much better options. The incentives in OBGYN handled hospital births are not always doing what's best for the baby. Often the agenda of the hospital or even the individual obstetrician is above that. There is obvious corruption and malpractice that is jeopardizing the health of much too many children each year. This in itself is a huge problem. Furthermore, the fact that many of the fatal or disabilitating decisions made by obstetricians are so easily avoided with patience and compassion make this problem that much more unethical, immoral, and inhumane.
Wagner also introduced alternative birthing centers. This was one of the alternatives he believed to be healthier than hospital birth, and with the nightmarish stories from hospital births he seems to be correct. In a hospital women are under almost complete control of the doctor and a lot of the birth is often done at the doctors convinience. However, birthing centers offer, baths, birthing chairsn candles, etc. In short the woman is allowed to create an enviornment she feels comfortable in. She is given control, she is more relaxed, and subsequently her birth should be relatively easier, less painful, and natural. Birth is a natural process and for 90 to 95 percent of births no surgical intervention or induction is neccesary yet this is how we treat birth. The alternatives being presented are much better options. The incentives in OBGYN handled hospital births are not always doing what's best for the baby. Often the agenda of the hospital or even the individual obstetrician is above that. There is obvious corruption and malpractice that is jeopardizing the health of much too many children each year. This in itself is a huge problem. Furthermore, the fact that many of the fatal or disabilitating decisions made by obstetricians are so easily avoided with patience and compassion make this problem that much more unethical, immoral, and inhumane.
Sunday, March 20, 2011
HW 39
The book "Born in the USA" by Marsden Wagner deals with the heirarchy and elitism of the OBGYN sector of doctors in the US medical system. The profession of OBGYN is highly regarded in the medical field. The beginning of the book tries to give the reader insight into the pride and cult like society that comprieses the OBGYN profession. Wagner emphasizes greatly the loyalty of this specific medical field as well as the status that accompanies it. However, the essential question this book deals with is the reform and reconstruction of a medical profession which is set up for failure in dealing with normal births. Wagner tells stories of neglectful and unsympathetic OBGYN's who are not compassionate with patients, make unneccesary interventions and put their own schedules over the needs of the mother or the baby. However, he makes a very distinction between a cartoony view on the situation and a realistic view. Although he aknowledges the wrong that many people in this profession are guilty of he places the blame on the system more so than individual. Wagner shows how the impossible amount of work and the OBGYN specialties conflict with many of the patients they deal with who have normal births. OBGYN's are surgeons who are taught to make incisions and "cut first when in doubt". The conflict here is obvious, birth is a natural process and OBGYN's are surgeons. Birth is not a medical problem that needs to be fixed by doctors. A more effective healthy way is assisting with the birth rather than trying to control. This is where the pride and loyalty in the profession restrains change. It is hard for doctors to admit they are doing things incorrectly or make mistakes because they are viewed as the experts who are all knowing on the subject, when in reality the are humans and they are bound to mess up as well.
The biggest message I have extracted from the book was that the problems we face are very easily solvable however the system in place is very resistant and restictive against change. There is a strong sense of traditionalism even though sientific evidence opposes many of the practice deemed normal by OBGYN's. Wagner has expertly stated his opinions and used very concrete, relative, and influential evidence to back it up. He used a number of personal stories, stories from patients, and numerical data to back up all his opinons. Besides the point he is trying to prove being pretty obvious, he does a good job of explaining the complexity of the issue and why it hasn't been solved already. Once again it is the system, ideals, and tradition that are holding us back from progressing and bettering the way we deal with birth.
The biggest message I have extracted from the book was that the problems we face are very easily solvable however the system in place is very resistant and restictive against change. There is a strong sense of traditionalism even though sientific evidence opposes many of the practice deemed normal by OBGYN's. Wagner has expertly stated his opinions and used very concrete, relative, and influential evidence to back it up. He used a number of personal stories, stories from patients, and numerical data to back up all his opinons. Besides the point he is trying to prove being pretty obvious, he does a good job of explaining the complexity of the issue and why it hasn't been solved already. Once again it is the system, ideals, and tradition that are holding us back from progressing and bettering the way we deal with birth.
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
HW 36
Interview 1
From the first interview the interviewee had a relatively "easy" birth. One point that she reiterated was that she was so scared going into labor from all the terror stories she read and her friends told her. Although the birth was painful she had her husband to help her relax and that made a very significant difference. She found the birth process much easier to handle when she focused on relaxation. Although she had her birth in a hospital she refused the epidural. She made a point of the importance of her husbands help and the difference that made in her situation.
This story was very different from many of the terrible stories that one many times associates with birth. The fact that the birthing process was less painful then she expected reflects a lot on our society's persepective on birth. Howevern of course every woman's experience is different so although she found relaxing helped her significantly that is not the case for everybody. Birth is a difficult subject to study and categorize since experiences vary so drastically. However, one thing that can be studied in a more concrete way, or at least more accurate, is society perspective on birth. This story showed the transformation of birth as a natural process into something that is medical. The fear and the medicalization of birth could be a coincidence, but I believe they are not. As is many other things connected woth medicine. Much of the fear of birth is warranted as so much can go wrong during birth. However, in the end if birth is a medical process more drugs can be used, hence creating more profit. As we learned in the illness and dying unit those in charge of the health care and hospitals in this country are very insensitive to human issues and feelings. I don't see why birth would be treated any different in the eyes of those in power.
Interview 2
Interviewee 2 had a relatively "easy" birth as well. However, she did not make as much of a point of emphasizing the difference in her birth from stories she read/heard. Her birth was still very painful, in fact it was the most pain she ever felt. She talked about focusing on breathing and relaxing. She also gave birth in a hospital. However, the relaxation seemed less theraputic for her. She was able to make it through the birth by keeping in mind the outcome and the reward of the process. She was so excited to be a mother that this became her drive during the actual birth.
With this interview I got much less insight on societal views in relation to birth. However, there seems to be a common theme between this interviewee and the last one. They both had something to push them through, something to use a drive to make it through the birth. They also birth described their birth as fairly easy s o it seems this is a pretty good method. Or maybe they are just lucky
Interview 3
Interviewee three had a very different birth from the first two. She, like the last two interviewee's gave birth in a hospital. Similar too the last two she also wanted to have a birth without the epidural. She seemed to follow many of the same things that helped alleviate the pain of the last two women. Unfortunately this was not as helpful for her as she gave in and got the epidural. She seemed fine with getting the epidural and although the birth was very difficult she emphasized that it was not as scary as it was made to see.
This last interview was most interesting to me because although she had a very difficult birth, especially compared to the last two interviewee's she also emphasized that the stories she heard/read had her overly scared. Once again the societal views on birth have shown to have a big impact on the mother emotionally. It can not be helpful to have someone go into a painful experience believing the experience will be in some cases will not be as painful. The mindset someone has will greatly affect the way the feel and react, and ultimately have some impact on the way the birth goes.
From these interviews the biggest point I extracted was that a womans mindset going in to birth is very highly correlated with the severity of pain and stress she feels during birth. Furthermore, societies perspective on birth has not shown to beneficial for woman as in general in our society birth is viewed as a medical issue doctors have to "fix" rather than a natural process that should take it's course naturally.
From the first interview the interviewee had a relatively "easy" birth. One point that she reiterated was that she was so scared going into labor from all the terror stories she read and her friends told her. Although the birth was painful she had her husband to help her relax and that made a very significant difference. She found the birth process much easier to handle when she focused on relaxation. Although she had her birth in a hospital she refused the epidural. She made a point of the importance of her husbands help and the difference that made in her situation.
This story was very different from many of the terrible stories that one many times associates with birth. The fact that the birthing process was less painful then she expected reflects a lot on our society's persepective on birth. Howevern of course every woman's experience is different so although she found relaxing helped her significantly that is not the case for everybody. Birth is a difficult subject to study and categorize since experiences vary so drastically. However, one thing that can be studied in a more concrete way, or at least more accurate, is society perspective on birth. This story showed the transformation of birth as a natural process into something that is medical. The fear and the medicalization of birth could be a coincidence, but I believe they are not. As is many other things connected woth medicine. Much of the fear of birth is warranted as so much can go wrong during birth. However, in the end if birth is a medical process more drugs can be used, hence creating more profit. As we learned in the illness and dying unit those in charge of the health care and hospitals in this country are very insensitive to human issues and feelings. I don't see why birth would be treated any different in the eyes of those in power.
Interview 2
Interviewee 2 had a relatively "easy" birth as well. However, she did not make as much of a point of emphasizing the difference in her birth from stories she read/heard. Her birth was still very painful, in fact it was the most pain she ever felt. She talked about focusing on breathing and relaxing. She also gave birth in a hospital. However, the relaxation seemed less theraputic for her. She was able to make it through the birth by keeping in mind the outcome and the reward of the process. She was so excited to be a mother that this became her drive during the actual birth.
With this interview I got much less insight on societal views in relation to birth. However, there seems to be a common theme between this interviewee and the last one. They both had something to push them through, something to use a drive to make it through the birth. They also birth described their birth as fairly easy s o it seems this is a pretty good method. Or maybe they are just lucky
Interview 3
Interviewee three had a very different birth from the first two. She, like the last two interviewee's gave birth in a hospital. Similar too the last two she also wanted to have a birth without the epidural. She seemed to follow many of the same things that helped alleviate the pain of the last two women. Unfortunately this was not as helpful for her as she gave in and got the epidural. She seemed fine with getting the epidural and although the birth was very difficult she emphasized that it was not as scary as it was made to see.
This last interview was most interesting to me because although she had a very difficult birth, especially compared to the last two interviewee's she also emphasized that the stories she heard/read had her overly scared. Once again the societal views on birth have shown to have a big impact on the mother emotionally. It can not be helpful to have someone go into a painful experience believing the experience will be in some cases will not be as painful. The mindset someone has will greatly affect the way the feel and react, and ultimately have some impact on the way the birth goes.
From these interviews the biggest point I extracted was that a womans mindset going in to birth is very highly correlated with the severity of pain and stress she feels during birth. Furthermore, societies perspective on birth has not shown to beneficial for woman as in general in our society birth is viewed as a medical issue doctors have to "fix" rather than a natural process that should take it's course naturally.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)