The process of technological change in obstetrics must be understood as contingent on
the exigencies of the professional project, rather than in terms simply of improvement
or dehumanization of care. Transformation in the procedures by which the female pelvis
and the fetal head have been measured illustrate this point. The development of new
measurement techniques was profoundly influenced by the shifting locus of obstetric care
and by changing professional concerns, including the initial demarcation of a professional practice and subsequent debates about preferred modes of intervention.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Antler, J., and D. Fox.1976. The movement toward a safe maternity: Physician accountability in New York City, 1915-1940. Bull. Hist. Med.50:569.
2.
Arney, W.R.1982. Power and the profession of obstetrics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
3.
Ball, R.P., and S.S. Marchbanks .1935. Roentgen pelvimetry and fetal cephalometry: A new technic. Radiology24:77.
4.
Bijker, W., T. P. Hughes , and T. Pinch, eds. 1987. The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology. Cambridge: MIT Press.
5.
Birnholz, J.C.1984. Gestational age. American Journal of Radiology142:849.
6.
Blume, S.S.1992. Insight and industry: The dynamics of technological change in medicine. Cambridge: MIT Press .
7.
Browne, F.J.1951. Antenatal care. London.
8.
Caldwell, W.E., and H.C. Moloy.1933. Anatomical variations in the female pelvis and their effect in labor, with a suggested classification. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology26:479.
9.
Campbell, S., and G.B. Newman.1971. Growth of the fetal biparietal diameter during normal pregnancy. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology78:513.
10.
Cartwright, A.1979. The dignity of labour? A study of childbearing and induction . London: Tavistock.
11.
Corea, G.1985. The mother machine. New York.
12.
De Lee, J.B.1920. The prophylactic forceps operation. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology1:34-44.
13.
Discussion of the paper "The Clinical Significance of X-ray Pelvimetry," read by Dr. Thoms. 1922. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology3:599-600.
14.
Donald, I.1980. Medical sonar: The first 25 years. In Recent advances in ultrasound diagnosis. Vol. 2, edited by A. Kurjak, 4-24. Amsterdam : Exerpta Medica.
15.
Donald, I., J. McVicar, and T.G. Brown.1958. Investigation of abdominal masses by pulsed ultrasound. Lancet1:1188.
16.
Eulner, H.H.1970. Die Entwicklung de medizinischen Spezialfächer an den Universitäten des deutschen Sprachegebietes. Stuttgart : Ferdinant Enke Verlag.
17.
Fassbender, H.1906. Geschichte der Geburtshülfe. Jena: Fischer.
18.
Flynn, A., and J. Kelly.1982. Fetal monitoring in labor. In Monitoring high-risk pregnancy: Recent advances in obstetrics and gynecology , edited by J. Bonnard, 14.
19.
Freidson, E.1970. The profession of medicine. New York : Harper & Row.
20.
Haas-Posthuma, J. H. de.1962. Perinatale sterfte in Nederland. Assen : van Gorcum
21.
Halpern, S.A.1988. American pediatrics: The social dynamics of professionalism, 1880-1980. Berkeley: University of California Press.
22.
Hiddinga, A.1987. Obstetrical research in the Netherlands in the nineteenth century. Medical History31:281.
23.
—. 1991. X-ray technology in obstetrics: Measuring pelves at the Yale School of Medicine. In Medical innovation in historical perspective, edited by J. V. Pickstone, 220-46. London : Macmillan.
24.
Koch, E.B.1990. The process of innovation in medical technology: American research on ultrasound, 1947 to 1962. Ph.D. diss., University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
25.
Leavitt, J. Waltzer.1986. Brought to bed: Childbearing in America, 1750-1950. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
26.
Litzmann, C.1884. Die Geburt beim engen Becken. Leipzig .
27.
Mengert, W., and M. Korkmas.1957. 3772 labors following radiographic mensuration . American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology54:151.
28.
Michaelis, G.A.1851. Das enge Becken nach eigenen Betrachtungen und Untersuchungen . Leipzig.
29.
New York Academy of Medicine, Committee on Public Health Relations.1933. Maternal mortality in New York City: A study of all puerperal deaths, 1930-1932. New York: Commonwealth Fund.
30.
Oakley, A.1984. The captured womb: A history of the medical care of pregnant women. Oxford: Blackwell.
31.
Reece, L.N.1935. The estimation of fetal maturity by a new method of x-ray cephalometry: Its bearing on clinical midwifery. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine28:45.
32.
Shorter, E.1984. A history of women's bodies. London : Pelican.
33.
Thompson, et al. 1965. Fetal development as determined by pulse echo techniques. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology92:44.
34.
Thoms, H.1922. Outlining the superior strait of the pelvis by means of x-ray. AmericanJournal of Obstetrics and Gynecology4:257.
35.
—. 1925. A newly modified method for determining the area of the pelvic inlet by x-ray pelvimetry. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology9:667.
36.
van Deventer, H.1701. Operationes chirurgicae novum lumen exhiben tes obstetricantibus . Lugdunum Batavorum.
37.
Wertz, D.C.1983. What birth has done for doctors: A historical view. Women and Health8(1): 7-25.
38.
Wertz, R.C., and D.C. Wertz.1979. A history of childbirth in America. New York.
39.
Willocks, J., et al. 1964. Fetal cephalometry by ultrasound. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 71:11.
40.
Willocks, J., et al. 1967. Intrauterine growth assessed by ultrasonic fetal cephalometry. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology . 74:639.
