The dominant discourse of ‘risk’ underlies the medical surveillance of pregnant
women. This article draws upon interview data from a purposeful sample of
twenty-seven childbearing women, focusing on the tensions and negotiations that
take place for these women between the informal, everyday experiences of
childbearing and the formal boundaries of organised medical/midwifery care.
Through such techniques as narrative reconstruction, rationalisation, and
resistance and compromise, our respondents were active agents in interpreting
and shaping their reproductive experiences. Yet, their experiences were
invariably framed within the dominant discourse of medicine, pointing to its
relevance even for women choosing alternative models of maternity care.
AllenD.
(2000) ‘Negotiating the Role of Expert Carers on
an Adult Hospital Ward’, Sociology of Health and
Illness, 22,
149–71.
2.
ArneyW.R.
(1982) Power and the Profession of Obstetrics.Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
3.
BC VITAL STATISTICS AGENCY
(2003). Total births attended by physician, midwife,
and unregistered attendant, by local health area, and by place of
birth, in British Columbia, 2001-2. (Custom data
set).
BenoitC.,
WREDES.,
BOURGEAULTI.,
SANDALLJ.,
VAN
TEIJLINGENE., and
DEVRIESR.
(2005) ‘Understanding the Social Organisation of
Maternity Care Systems: Midwifery as a Touchstone’,
Sociology of Health and Illness, 27,
722–737.
6.
BourgeaultI.L.,
BENOITC.,
DAVIS-FLOYDR.
(2004) ‘Introduction: Reconceiving midwifery in
Canada’, In
BourgeaultI.L.,
BenoitC.,
& Davis-FloydR.
(editors) Reconceiving Midwifery: The New Canadian Model of
Care (pp. 3–13).
Montreal-Kingston:
McGill-Queens University
Press.
BurtchB.
(1994) Trials of labour: The Re-Emergence of
Midwifery.Montreal: McGill-Queen's
University Press.
9.
BuryM.
(1998) ‘Postmodernity and
health’, In
ScramblerG.,
& HiggsP.
(editors) Modernity, Medicine and Health (pp.
1–28). London:
Routledge.
10.
BuryM.
(2004) ‘Researching patient - professional
interactions’, Journal of Health Services Research
and Policy, 9,
48–54.
11.
ClarkeA.E.,
SHIMJ.K.,
MAMOL.,
FOSKETJ.R.,
FISHMANJ.R.
(2003) ‘Biomedicalisation: technoscientific
transformations of health, illness, and U.S. biomedicine’,
American Sociological Review, 68,
161–194.
12.
CMBC (2003).
College of Midwives of British Columbia website.http://www.cmbc.ca.
13.
ConradP.
(1992) ‘Medicalisation and social
control’, Annual Review of Sociology,
18, 209–232.
14.
ConradP.
(2005) ‘The shifting engines of
medicalisation’, Journal of Health and Social
Behavior, 46,
3–14.
15.
ConradP.,
LEITERV.
(2004) ‘Medicalisation, markets and
consumers’, Journal of Health and Social
Behavior, 45,
158–176.
16.
CreswellJ.W.
(2003). ‘Research design: qualitative, quantitative,
and mixed methods approaches’, Second Edition.Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
17.
DenzinN.K.,
LINCOLNY.S.
(1994) Handbook of Qualitative Research.Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
18.
DevriesR.
(2005) A Pleasing Birth: Midwives and Maternity Care in
the Netherlands.Philadelphia, PA: Temple
University Press.
19.
DevriesR.,
SALVESENH.B.,
WIEGERST.A.,
WILLIAMSA.S.
(2001) ‘What (and Why) Do Women Want? The
Desires of Women and the Design of Maternity Care’, In
DeVriesR.,
BenoitC.,
van
TeijlingenE.R., &
WredeS.
(editors) Birth By Design: Pregnancy, Maternity Care, and Midwifery in
North America and Europe (pp.
243–266). New York,
NY:
Routledge.
20.
EvettsJ.
(2003) ‘The sociological analysis of
professionalism. Occupational change in the modern world’,
International Sociology, 18,
395–415.
21.
FrankA.
(1995) The Wounded Storyteller: Body, Illness, and
Ethics.Chicago: The University of
Chicago Press.
22.
FrankA.
(2000) ‘Illness and the interactionist
vocation’, Symbolic Interaction,
23, 321–332.
23.
FreidsonE.
(1988) Profession of Medicine: A Study of the Sociology
of Applied Knowledge.Chicago, Ill.: University Chicago
Press.
24.
HolsteinJ.A.,
GUBRIUMJ.F.
(2000) The Self We Live By: Narrative Identity in a
Postmodern World.New York: Oxford University
Press.
25.
JonesL.,
GREENJ.
(2006) ‘Shifting discourses of professionalism:
a case study of general practitioners in the United
Kingdom’, Sociology of Health and Illness,
28, 927–950.
26.
KitzingerC.,
WILLMOTTJ.
(2002) ‘The thief of womanhood’: women's
experience of polycystic ovarian syndrome’, Social
Science and Medicine, 54,
349–361.
27.
KleinmanS.
(1996) Opposing Ambitions: Gender and Ambition in an
Alternation Organisation.Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
28.
KlugeE.
(1999) ‘The Canadian health care system: an
analytical perspective’, Health Care
Analysis, 7,
377–391.
29.
LincolnY.S.,
GUBAE.G.
(1985) Naturalistic Inquiry.Newbury Park, CA:
Sage.
30.
LorberJ.
(1975) ‘Women and medical sociology: invisible
professionals and ubiquitous patients’, In
MillmanM.,
& KanterR.M.
(editors) Another Voice: Feminist Perspectives on Social Life and Social
Science (pp. 75–105).
New York: Anchor
Press.
31.
LuptonD.
(1997) ‘Foucault and the medicalisation
critique’, In
PetersenA.,
& BuntonR.
(editors) Foucault, Health and Medicine (pp.
94–110).
London:
Routledge.
32.
MillerT.
(2000) ‘Losing the plot: narrative construction
and longitudinal childbirth research.’Qualitative Health Research, 10,
309–323.
33.
MillerW.L.,
CrabtreeB.F.
(1992) ‘Primary care research: a multimethod
typology and qualitative road map’, In
CrabtreeB.F.,
& MillerW.L.
(editors) Doing Qualitative Research: Research Methods for Primary Care,
Volume 3 (pp. 3–28).
Newbury Park, CA:
Sage.
34.
MontoM.
(1997) ‘The lingering presence of medical
definitions among women committed to natural childbirth’,
Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 26,
293–316.
35.
NancarrowS.,
and BORTHWICKA.
(2005) ‘Dynamic Professional Boundaries in the
Healthcare Workforce’, Sociology of Health and
Illness, 27,
897–919.
36.
OkmaKGH
(2002) ‘What is the best public-private model
for Canadian health care?’, Policy Matters,
3, 1–60.
37.
PattonM.Q.
(1990) Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods,
second edition.Newbury Park, CA:
Sage.
38.
PhippsH.
(2001) ‘Carrying their own medical records: the
perspective of pregnant women’, Australian and New
Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 41,
398–401.
39.
RiessmanC.K.
(1983) ‘Women and medicalisation: a new
perspective’, Social Policy,
14, 3–18.
40.
RothmanB.K.
(2001). ‘Spoiling the pregnancy: prenatal
diagnosis in the Netherlands’, In
DeVriesR.,
BenoitC.,
van
TeijlingenE.R., &
WredS.
(editors) Birth By Design: Pregnancy, Maternity Care, and Midwifery in
North America and Europe (pp.
180–200). New York,
NY:
Routledge.
41.
RuzekS.B.
(1978) The Women's Health Movement: Feminist
Alternatives to Medical Control.New York:
Praeger.
42.
SaksM.
(1995). Professions and the Public Interest: Medical
Power, Altruism and Alternative Medicine.London,
Routledge.
43.
SandallJ.,
BENOITC.,
VAN
TEIJLINGENE.,
WREDES.,
WESTFALLR.,
and MURRAYS. (in
press). ‘Social Service Professional or Market Expert? Maternity
Care Relations under Neoliberal Healthcare Reform.’Current Sociology.
44.
SnowD.
(2001) ‘Extending and Broadening Blumer's
Conceptualisation of Symbolic Interactionism’,
Symbolic Interaction, 24,
367–377.
45.
Van
TeijlingenE.
(2005) ‘A Critical Analysis of the Medical Model
as used in the Study of Pregnancy and Childbirth’,
Sociological Research Online,
10(2), http://www.socresonline.org.uk/10/2/teijlingen.html.
46.
WebbC.
(1999) ‘Analyzing qualitative data: computerised
and other approaches’, Journal of Advanced
Nursing, 29,
323–330.
47.
WeinerE.L.,
SWAING.R.,
WOLFB.,
GOTTLIEBM.
(2001) ‘A qualitative study of physicians’ own
wellness-promotion practices’, Western Journal of
Medicine, 174,
19–23.
48.
WertzR.R.,
WERTZD.C.
(1989) Lying-In: A History of Childbirth in America,
Expanded edition.New Haven: Yale University
Press.
49.
WilliamsG.
(2003) ‘The determinants of health: structure,
context and agency’, Sociology of Health and
Illness, 25,
131–154.
50.
WilliamsG.,
POPAYJ.
(1994) ‘Lay Knowledge and the Privilege of
Experience’, In
GabeJ.,
KelleherD.,
& WilliamsG.
(editors) Challenging Medicine (pp.
118–139).
London:
Routledge.
51.
WredeS.,
BENOITC.,
SANDALLJ.
(2001) ‘The State and Birth/The State of Birth:
Maternal Health Policies in Three Countries’, In
DeVriesR.,
BenoitC.,
Van
TeijlingenE., &
WredeS.
(editors) Birth by Design: Pregnancy, Maternity Care, and Midwifery in
North America and Europe (pp. 28–50).
London:
Routledge.
52.
WredeS.,
BENOITC.,
BOURGEAULTI.,
VAN
TIEJLINGENE.,
SANDALLJ.,
DEVRIESR.
(2006) ‘Decentred comparative research. context
sensitive analysis of maternal health care’, Social
Science & Medicine, 63,
2986–2997.
53.
ZadoroznyjM.
(2001) ‘Birth and the ‘reflexive consumer’:
trust, risk and medical dominance in obstetric encounters’,
Journal of Sociology, 31,
117.
54.
ZolaI.K.
(1972) ‘Medicine as an institution of social
control’, Sociological Review,
20, 487–504.
