ArticleJournal of evaluation in clinical practice2022
A stigmatizing dilemma in the labour room: Irrationality or selfishness?
Article in Journal of evaluation in clinical practice, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Obstetric violence as epistemic injustice: childbirth trouble.]Salud colectiva · 2023Article
- Navigating intensive altered states of consciousness: How can the set and setting key parameters promote the science of human birth?Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Article
- A stigmatizing dilemma in the labour room: Irrationality or selfishness?Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2022Article
- Philosophy and the clinic: Stigma, respect and shame.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Nowadays, a considerable number of women have a negative or outright traumatic birth experience. Literature shows that being involved in decision-making and exercising autonomy are important factors in having a positive birth experience. In this article, I explore the hypothesis that some views characteristic of the biomedical model of childbirth may hinder women's involvement in decision-making, leading them to what I have dubbed as a 'stigmatizing dilemma'; that is, to be perceived and treated as either irrational or selfish when trying to exercise their autonomy in the labour room. I suggest that such a stigmatizing dilemma arises when the following views are uncritically and unqualifiedly endorsed: (1) childbirth is a process fraught with risk, particularly to babies; (2) labouring women's reports are unreliable and their subjective perspective does not constitute a valuable source of information; (3) medical knowledge and procedures are the safest means to give birth. In a scenario where (1)-(3) are strongly endorsed, if birthing women act according to instrumental rationality and want the best for their babies, they will be expected to just leave decisions to medical experts. Thus, not following expert directions might lead women to fall under the stigma of either irrationality or selfishness: they could be perceived and treated as either irrational, since they may not seem to seek the best means to accomplish their goal; or selfish, since they may seem to pursue goals other than the baby's health. I examine these stigmas in relation to two ideals: that of disembodied rationality and that of selfless motherhood. I also explore different ways in which the views and prejudices underlying this stigmatizing dilemma could be challenged.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.