ok, bear with me while I think out loud in your general
direction....
well we have the 'baby friendly hospital initiative', so how
about the 'woman friendly birth centre'? I mean, better
still, 'the community' (representatives of) should really be
heavily involved in this kind of primary care health
structure (physical as well as intellectual), then it could
be 'community-led birth centre'..... I think (right now this
minute, subject to change without notice) that as long as we
are identifying the structure (ie the physical space, not
the governing body) with the politics of care provision (ie,
who is the 'primary carer') then we are going to have
confusion. I had a bit of a look at what constitutes
'midwifery-led care' & 'continuity of carer' etc, for an
assignment at uni, & these terms encompass a whole range of
different models of care - its not as clear cut as it seems!
The definitions would seem to be consistent, but how it
works out in practice 'on the coalface' (now theres a term
that seriously needs an overhaul!) varies enormously.
As I said, Im guessing that what we'd mostly like to see is
the idea of a 'woman-led' birthing culture actually
happening.... & that requires a shift in perception not only
for Mr & Mrs Joe Average (boy, Im just piling up the dodgy
metaphors arent I?) but for the PTB's within the 'health
culture' ..... because that means moving away from the whole
'doctor as God' thing that goes with relinquishing
responsibility = litigation etc, to actually believing that
'ordinary people' can take responsibility for thier
health/care... as long as the 'ordinary people' wont or cant
do that, there will be others who do, & where there is
responsibility there is power, & where there is power there
are invariably individuals who are drawn to it.....
Starhawk in her book Truth or Dare identifies 3 kinds of
power in society - power-over ( backed by force or some
other kind of control, deeply embedded in heirarchical
structures, enables one individual to make decisions that
affect others..); power-within ('empowerment', a sense of
personal control & 'mindfullness'..); & power-with
(influence, the power not to command, but to suggest & be
listened to or not, to work with others for a common
goal..)....
& Im bringing this up because what I see is a clash of
cultures, where midwives are 'traditionally' allied with
women & their self-identified needs (power-with) rather than
that of the institution which is all about heirarchy &
control (power-over) because it was spawned from a
militaristic culture....
So really we are talking different languages - the language
of 'power-over' is very different to that of
'power-with'.... & to come back circuitously to my point
(its there somewhere!), the terms that keep being used
('midwifery-led care', 'medical-based model', even
'free-standing birthing unit') come from the language of
'power-over'.... because they all identify who is 'in
control', who is in the 'power-over' position...
um, Ive just looked at the time & Ive gotta run, thanx for
bearing with me while I ramble incontinently, & I will leave
you with one of my favorite definitions - madness is when
you froth at the mouth; insanity is when you froth at the
brain (sorry, has absolutely no bearing on this
conversation, completely irrelevant, but for some reason I
remembered it now - Im just a sharing kinda gal)
jennifairy
> As I watched the 7.30 Report last night, that dreadful
> term "midwifery led unit" kept springing up. I have a
> real problem with this term, as you can read on My Diary:
>
> http://www.birthinternational.com/diary/index.html
>
> Can't we do better than this?
>
> Thinking caps on please!
>
> Andrea
>
> -----
> Andrea Robertson
> Birth International * ACE Graphics * Associates in
> Childbirth Education
>
> e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> web: www.birthinternational.com
--
This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics.
Visit <http://www.acegraphics.com.au> to subscribe or unsubscribe.
