Pain "Is" the Club: Identity and Membership in the Natural Childbirth Community

Adam Rafalovich

doi:10.18778/1733-8077.12.3.05

Authors

Adam Rafalovich Pacific University, U.S.A.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18778/1733-8077.12.3.05

Keywords:

United States, Natural Childbirth, Medicalization, Epidurals, Pitocin, Gender, Club Membership

Abstract

Based upon interview data collected from 50 respondents, this study examines how expectant mothers navigate the divide between natural and non-natural childbirth when faced with the dilemma of using chemical pain management. The vast majority of participants in this study had strong intentions of delivering without any type of chemical pain management, but when faced with intense physical pain and/or coaxing from medical authorities, made the decision to use an epidural. Respondent accounts illustrate that the decision to use an epidural effectively removed them from membership in the “natural childbirth club.” In order to better understand this process of group inclusion/exclusion, I draw upon the symbolic interaction frameworks of George Herbert Mead (1934) and Norbert Wiley (1995), paying special attention to their theories of the self. This study concludes that the decision to use chemical pain management in the childbirth process is often done so at the expense of changes in identity with respect to the Generalized Other of the “natural childbirth” community.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Adam Rafalovich, Pacific University, U.S.A.

Adam Rafalovich received his Ph.D. in Sociology from the University of British Columbia in 2002. His doctoral dissertation was a social analysis of the response of adult authorities to children suspected of having Attention Deficit / Hyperactivity Disorder. This research became the backbone of his book Framing ADHD Children (Rowman and Littlefield-Lexington Books, 2004). Dr. Rafalovich has published widely in the area of medical sociology, with articles appearing in Sociological Quarterly, Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, and Deviant Behavior, and in issues of Sociology of Health and Illness and Symbolic Interaction. Dr. Rafalovich is an Associate Professor of Sociology at Pacific University in Forest Grove, Oregon, U.S.A.

References

Akrich, Madeleine and Bernike Pasveer. 2004. “Embodiment and Disembodiment in Childbirth Narratives.” Body & Society 10(2-3):63-84. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1357034X04042935

Allen, Davina. 2001. “Social Perspectives on Pregnancy and Childbirth for Midwives, Nurses, and the Caring Professions.” Sociology of Health and Illness 23(3):386-396. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.00257

Arney, William R. and Jane Neill. 1982. “The Location of Pain in Childbirth: Natural Childbirth and the Transformation of Obstetrics.” Sociology of Health and Illness 4(1):1-24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.ep11345575

Barnes, Hayden H. 2011. The Ring of Fire: The Psychological Purpose of Pain in Childbirth. MA Thesis. Pacific Graduate Institute.

Biernacki, Patrick and Dan Waldorf. 1981. “Snowball Sampling: Problems and Techniques of Chain Referral Sampling.” Sociological Methods and Research 10:141-163. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/004912418101000205

Brubaker, Sarah J. and Heather E. Dillaway. 2009. “Medicalization, Natural Childbirth, and Birthing Experiences.” Sociology Compass 3(1):31-48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9020.2008.00183.x

Christiaens, Wendy, Sarah Van de Velde, and Piet Bracke. 2011. “Pregnant Women’s Fear of Childbirth in Midwife- and Obstetrician-Led Care in Belgium and the Netherlands: Test of the Medicalization Hypothesis.” Women & Health 51(3):220-239. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03630242.2011.560999

Davis-Floyd, Robbie. 1994. “The Technocratic Body: American Childbirth as Cultural Expression.” Social Science and Medicine 38(8):1125-1140. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0277-9536(94)90228-3

Dillaway, Heather and Sarah J. Brubaker. 2006. “Intersectionality and Childbirth: How Women From Different Social Locations Discuss Epidural Use.” Race, Gender & Class 13(3-4):16-41.

England, Pam and Rob Horowitz. 1998. Birthing From Within: An Extra-Ordinary Guide to Childbirth Preparation. Santa Barbara, CA: Partera Press.

Epstein, Abby, director. 2008. The Business of Being Born. U.S.A.: Barranca Productions.

Fisher, Colleen, Yvonne Hauck, and Jenny Fenwick. 2006. “How Social Context Impacts on Women’s Fears of Child- birth: A Western Australian Example.” Social Science & Medicine 63(1):64-75. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.11.065

Fontana, Andrea and James H. Frey. 2000. “The Interview: From Structured Questions to Negotiated Text.” Pp. 645-72 in The Handbook of Qualitative Research, edited by N. Denzin and Y. Lincoln. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Fowler, Alexandra. 2009. Moms, Midwives, and MDs: A Mixed-Methods Study of the Medicalization and Demedicalization of Childbirth. Doctoral Dissertation. Duke University.

Fox, Bonnie and Diana Worts. 1999. “Revisiting the Critique of Medicalized Childbirth: A Contribution to the Sociology of Birth.” Gender & Society 13(3):326-346. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/089124399013003004

Glaser, Barney G. 1978. Theoretical Sensitivity: Advances in the Methodology of Grounded Theory. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.

Glaser, Barney G. and Anselm L. Strauss. 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00006199-196807000-00014

Guillemin, Jeanne H. and Lynda L. Holmstrom. 1986. “The Business of Childbirth.” Society 23(5):48-54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02695558

Levesque-Lopman, Louise. 1983. “Decision and Experience: A Phenomenological Analysis of Pregnancy and Childbirth.” Human Studies 6(3):247-277. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02127765

Mansfield, Becky. 2008. “The Social Nature of Natural Childbirth.” Social Science & Medicine 66(5):1084-1094. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.11.025

Marshall, Gordon. 1996. The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Sociology. Oxford: Oxford Press.

Mead, George H. 1934. Mind, Self, and Society: From the Standpoint of a Social Behaviorist. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Miller, Amy C. and Thomas E. Shriver. 2012. “Women’s Childbirth Preferences and Practices in the United States.” Social Science & Medicine 75(4):709-716. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.03.051

Monto, Martin A. 1997. “The Lingering Presence of Medical Definitions Among Women Committed to Natural Childbirth.” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 26(3):293-316. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/089124197026003002

Moore, Sara B. 2011. “Reclaiming the Body, Birthing at Home: Knowledge, Power, and Control in Childbirth.” Humanity and Society 35(4):376-389. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/016059761103500403

Morton, Christine H. 2003. “Doula Care: The (Re)-Emergence of Woman-Supported Childbirth in the United States.” Doctoral Dissertation. University of California.

Nash, Anedith and Jeffrey E. Nash. 1979. “Conflicting Interpretations of Childbirth: The Medical and Natural Perspectives.” Urban Life 7(4):493-512. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/089124167900700404

Nelson, Margaret K. 1983. “Working-Class Women, Middle-Class Women, and Models of Childbirth.” Social Problems 30(3):284-297. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.1983.30.3.03a00050

Norr, Kathleen L. et al. 1977. “Explaining Pain and Enjoyment in Childbirth.” Journal of Health and Social Behavior 18(3):260-275. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2136353

Oakley, Ann. 1980. Women Confined: Towards a Sociology of Childbirth. New York: Schocken Books.

Osterman, Michelle J. K. and Joyce A. Martin. 2011. “Epidural and Spinal Anesthesia Use During Labor: 27-state Reporting Area, 2008.” National Vital Statistics Reports 59(5):1-16. Retrieved April 05, 2016 http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr59/nvsr59_05.pdf

Rothman, Barbara K. 1978. “Childbirth as Negotiated Reality.” Symbolic Interaction 1(2):124-137. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/si.1978.1.2.124

Sargent, Carolyn and Nancy Stark. 1989. “Childbirth Education and Childbirth Models: Parental Perspectives on Control, Anesthesia, and Technological Intervention in the Birth Process.” Medical Anthropology Quarterly (New Series) 3(1):36-51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/maq.1989.3.1.02a00030

Stockill, Clare. 2007. “Trust the Experts? A Commentary on Choice and Control in Childbirth.” Feminism & Psychology 17(4):571-577. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0959353507083093

Strauss, Anselm M. and Juliet Corbin. 1990. Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Measures and Techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Walsh, Denis. 2006. “Subverting the Assembly-Line: Childbirth in a Free-Standing Birth Centre.” Social Science & Medicine 62(6):1330-1340. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.08.013

Walsh, Denis J. and S. Kitzinger. 2007. “A Birth Centre’s Encounters With Discourses of Childbirth: How Resistance Led to Innovation.” Sociology of Health and Illness 29(2):216-232. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9566.2007.00545.x

Webb, Eugene J. et al. 1966. Unobtrusive Measures: Non-Reactive Research in the Social Sciences. Chicago: Rand McNally.

Weitz, Rose and Deborah A. Sullivan. 1986. “The Politics of Childbirth: The Re-Emergence of Midwifery in Arizona.” Social Problems 33(3):163-175. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.1986.33.3.03a00010

Westfall, Rachel E. and Cecilia Benoit. 2004. “The Rhetoric of ‘Natural’ in Natural Childbirth: Childbearing Women’s Perspectives on Prolonged Pregnancy and Induction of Labour.” Social Science & Medicine 59(7):1397-1408. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.01.017

Wheeler, Eunice L. 1980. “The Demedicalization of Childbirth.” North Central Sociological Association. Retrieved April 05, 2016 http://search.proquest.com/docview/61729225?accountid=13047

Wiley, Norbert. 1995. The Semiotic Self. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Zadoroznyj, Maria. 1999. “States of Health: Health and Illness in Australia.” The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Sociology 25(1):136-137. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/144078338902500115