A cross-cultural comparison of midwifery in Great Britain and the United States
reveals its successful institutionalization in the former and failure in the latter country.
Struck by this comparison, a sociological analysis that employs historical data
centered in three classes of data—normative, political, and compositional—was
conducted Two hypotheses were generated through this analysis which may prove
generally useful for testing in modernizing countries. (1) The greater the emphasis
on childbirth as a normal physiological process by the medical profession and subsequently by their patients, the more likely the retention of midwifery and its eventual
professionalism. (2) The more localistic and diversified the system of legitimization
and control of midwives, the less likely internal visibility and a drive for professionalism and institutionalization, i.e., the less likely the development of midw ifery as a
visible institution .
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American College of Nurse-Midwives (1978) Functions, Standards, and Qualifications for Nurse-Midwifery Practice .
2.
Anisef, P. (1972) "Adult socialization: the study of a profession ." Ph.D. Dissertation, Cornell University.
3.
Aveling, J.H. (1872) English Midwives, Their History and Prospects. London: J. and A. Churchill.
4.
Bucher, R. and A. Strauss (1961) "Profession in process." Amer. J. of Sociology66: 325-334.
5.
Campbell, J.M. (1917) Report of the Physical Welfare of Mothers and Children . The Carnegie Kingdom Trust. Dublin : J. Falconer.
6.
Donnison, J. (1977) Midwives and Medical Men: A History of Inter-Professional Rivalries and Woman's Rights. London: Heinemann Educational Books Ltd.
7.
Edgar, J.C. (1911) "The remedy for the midwife problem." Amer. J. of Obstetrics and Diseases of Women and Children63: 822.
8.
Ehrenreich, B. and D. English (1973) Witches, Midwives and Nurses: A History of Women HealersOyster Bay, NY: The Feminist Press.
9.
Elliott, P. (1972) The Sociology of the Professions. New York: Herder and Herder.
10.
Findley, P. (1928) "The teaching of obstetrics." Amer. J. of Obstetrics and Gynecology16: 611-624
11.
Forbes, T.R. (1964) "The regulation of English midwives in the sixteenth century." Medical History8: 235-244.
12.
Freidson, E. (1970) Professional Dominance: The Social Structure of Medical Care. New York: Atherton Press.
13.
Galdston, I. (1937) Maternal Deaths—The Ways to Prevention. New York: The Commonwealth Fund.
14.
Greenwood, E. (1957) "Attributes of a profession." Social Work2 (July): 44-45
15.
Haygood, M. (1927) "Coordination of official and volunteer health agencies in Knoxville, Tennessee." Amer. J. of Public Health17: 1,117-1,121
16.
Hirst, B.C. (1930) "A reminiscence of an episode in the history of the Sloane Hospital." Amer. J of Obstetrics and Gynecology19: 683-691.
17.
Kerr, M. and J. Phillips (1959) Historical Review of British Obstetrics and Gynecology 1800-1950. Edinburgh and London: E. and S Livingstone Ltd.
18.
Kobrin, F. (1966) "The American midwifery controversy: acrisis of professionalization." Bull. of the History of Medicine40: 350-363.
19.
Kronus, C.L. (1976) "Occupational versus organizational influences on reference group indentification." Sociology of Work and Occupations3: 303-330.
20.
Litoff, J. ( 1978) American Midwives: 1860 to the Present. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
21.
Mechanic, D. (1968) Medical SociologyNew York: Macmillan.
22.
Merton, R.K. (1957) Social Theory and Social Structure. New York: Macmillan.
23.
Ministry of Health (1948) Report of the Working Party on Midwives. Department of Health for Scotland and of Labour and National Service
24.
Moran, J.F. (1915) "The endowment of motherhood." J. of the Amer. Medical Assn.64: 122-126.
25.
Nursing Notes (1895) Vol. 8 (January): 1-2.
26.
Poynter, F.N.L (1961) The Evolution of Medical Practice in Britain. London: Pitman Medical Publishing Company .
27.
Proceedings, White House Conference on Child Health and Protection, Committee on Prenatal and Maternal Care, morning session, February 20, 1931 Reported in Supplement, United States Daily, April 6, 1931, pp. 50-53.
28.
Rogers, E.M. and D.S. Solomon (1975) "Traditional midwives and family planning in Asia ." Studies in Family Planning6. 126-133.
29.
Rosenkrantz, B.G. (1974) "Cart before the horse: theory, practice and professional image in American public health, 1870-1920." J. of History of Medical and Applied Sci.24: 55-73.
30.
Stevens, R. (1971) American Medicine and the Public Interest. New Haven: Yale Univ Press.
31.
Transactions of the New York Academy of Medicine (1912) Special Meeting, April 25Amer. J. of Obstetrics and Gynecology65. 461-468.
32.
Vital Statistics of the United States (1972 ) Vol. I. U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Public Health Service, Health Resources Administration, National Center for Health Statistics.
33.
Wertz, R.W. and D.C. Wertz (1977) Lying-In, A History of Childbirth in America. New York: Macmillan.
34.
Williams, J.W. (1912) "Medical education and the midwife problem in the United States." J. of the Amer. Medical Assn.58: 1-7.
35.
Winslow, C.E.A. (1932) The Costs of Medicines, Midwives, Chiropodists and Optometnsts, the Healing Cults. Publications of the Committee on Costs of Medical Care 14 to 16. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
36.
Wood, A. (1963) "The development of the midwives service in Great Britain." Int. J. of Nursing Studies1: 51-58.
37.
Ziegler, C.E. (1913) "The elimination of the midwife." J. of the Amer Medical Assn.60: 32-38.
