Midwives, Women and the State: (De)Constructing Midwives and Pregnant Women in Ontario, Canada
Ontario's Midwifery Act came into effect on January 1, 1994, at a time of radical health care restructuring, marked by hospital closures and staffing cuts. In addition, feminist backlash was rampant in the popular media. Given these conditions, some have suggested that midwifery legislation was...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Canadian journal of political science 2011-09, Vol.44 (3), p.483-505 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 505 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 483 |
container_title | Canadian journal of political science |
container_volume | 44 |
creator | Paterson, Stephanie |
description | Ontario's Midwifery Act came into effect on January 1, 1994, at a time of radical health care restructuring, marked by hospital closures and staffing cuts. In addition, feminist backlash was rampant in the popular media. Given these conditions, some have suggested that midwifery legislation was implemented because it aligned with the government's cost-cutting initiatives, while others have suggested that the government was responding to the dissatisfaction with obstetric practice outlined by a well-organized lobby. While these factors were no doubt important in the passing of the legislation, I offer a more critical reading of the policy texts, suggesting that the legislation and its enabling regulations problematize not only costs or client satisfaction but also the knowledge of midwives and the women they serve. In framing the issue as one of public safety, the policy ensemble introduced a new form of birthing expert—the expert midwife—reimposing a hierarchical relationship in the birthing process, serving to reify medical science and to objectify birthing women. In so doing, the legislation potentially silences claims for both professional and reproductive autonomy. Résumé. La Loi sur les sages-femmes de l'Ontario est entrée en vigueur le premier janvier 1994 au cours d'une période houleuse dans le domaine de la santé qui fut marquée par des fermetures d'hôpitaux et des réductions de la main-d'œuvre. De plus, à cette époque, les médias populaires avaient clairement adopté une position antiféministe. Étant donné cette conjoncture, on proposa dans quelques articles que cette loi fut adoptée parce qu'elle cadrait bien avec les priorités gouvernementales de coupures budgétaires, tandis que d'autres insistèrent que le gouvernement ne faisait que réagir au mécontentement à l'endroit de la pratique obstétricale exprimé par un groupe d'intérêts puissant. Ces facteurs ont sans doute joué un rôle important dans l'adoption de la loi, mais je propose, en contrepartie, une interprétation plus critique des textes de politiques publiques. J'avance que la loi et sa réglementation soulignent une problématique qui va au delà des coûts et de la satisfaction de la clientèle, englobant aussi le savoir des sages-femmes et celui de leurs clientes. En formulant le débat en termes de sécurité publique, la législation a instauré une nouvelle forme d'expertise – l'experte sage-femme – qui réimpose une hiérarchie professionnelle dans le domaine de l'accouchement, ce qui a pour eff |
doi_str_mv | 10.1017/S000842391100045X |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1285625963</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cupid>10_1017_S000842391100045X</cupid><jstor_id>41300566</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>41300566</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c437t-2ab35490eac82dc93dc539bfb6e3c122320908e1d1facbc6b0952c8bfbd499073</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkV1LwzAYhYMoOKc_wAuheDVh1Xy2jXdSP2GiMEWvLGmazo41mUmq-O9t3VRQhF0l4TznvG84AOwieIggio_GEMKEYsIRam-UPa6BHoopDTnBdB30Ojns9E2w5dy0fcYxIz3wdF0Vb9WrcsPgwdRKB0IXgX9WwdgLr46Dwak6SI123jbSV3oSfPGf4K1VEy20X3orHdxoL2xlhkEqtCjENtgoxcypneXZB_fnZ3fpZTi6ubhKT0ahpCT2IRY5YZRDJWSCC8lJIRnheZlHikiEMcGQw0ShApVC5jLKIWdYJi1QUM5hTPpgsMidW_PSKOezunJSzWZCK9O4DOGERZjxiKyAYkQRYnhFFCYR7dD9X-jUNFa3f844jNoNk4S3EFpA0hrnrCqzua1qYd8zBLOuxuxPja1nb-GZOm_st4EiAiGLolYny0xR57YqJupn8v-pH67PpgA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>906073889</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Midwives, Women and the State: (De)Constructing Midwives and Pregnant Women in Ontario, Canada</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>Cambridge Journals</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><creator>Paterson, Stephanie</creator><creatorcontrib>Paterson, Stephanie</creatorcontrib><description>Ontario's Midwifery Act came into effect on January 1, 1994, at a time of radical health care restructuring, marked by hospital closures and staffing cuts. In addition, feminist backlash was rampant in the popular media. Given these conditions, some have suggested that midwifery legislation was implemented because it aligned with the government's cost-cutting initiatives, while others have suggested that the government was responding to the dissatisfaction with obstetric practice outlined by a well-organized lobby. While these factors were no doubt important in the passing of the legislation, I offer a more critical reading of the policy texts, suggesting that the legislation and its enabling regulations problematize not only costs or client satisfaction but also the knowledge of midwives and the women they serve. In framing the issue as one of public safety, the policy ensemble introduced a new form of birthing expert—the expert midwife—reimposing a hierarchical relationship in the birthing process, serving to reify medical science and to objectify birthing women. In so doing, the legislation potentially silences claims for both professional and reproductive autonomy. Résumé. La Loi sur les sages-femmes de l'Ontario est entrée en vigueur le premier janvier 1994 au cours d'une période houleuse dans le domaine de la santé qui fut marquée par des fermetures d'hôpitaux et des réductions de la main-d'œuvre. De plus, à cette époque, les médias populaires avaient clairement adopté une position antiféministe. Étant donné cette conjoncture, on proposa dans quelques articles que cette loi fut adoptée parce qu'elle cadrait bien avec les priorités gouvernementales de coupures budgétaires, tandis que d'autres insistèrent que le gouvernement ne faisait que réagir au mécontentement à l'endroit de la pratique obstétricale exprimé par un groupe d'intérêts puissant. Ces facteurs ont sans doute joué un rôle important dans l'adoption de la loi, mais je propose, en contrepartie, une interprétation plus critique des textes de politiques publiques. J'avance que la loi et sa réglementation soulignent une problématique qui va au delà des coûts et de la satisfaction de la clientèle, englobant aussi le savoir des sages-femmes et celui de leurs clientes. En formulant le débat en termes de sécurité publique, la législation a instauré une nouvelle forme d'expertise – l'experte sage-femme – qui réimpose une hiérarchie professionnelle dans le domaine de l'accouchement, ce qui a pour effet de solidifier la position de la médecine traditionnelle et d'objectiver les femmes. Ce faisant, la loi risque de négliger les revendications d'autonomie des professionnelles et des partisanes de l'accouchement naturel.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0008-4239</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1744-9324</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/S000842391100045X</identifier><identifier>CODEN: CJPSBD</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York, USA: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>20th century ; Birth ; Canada ; Client Satisfaction ; Closure ; Countermovements ; Females ; Feminism ; Frame analysis ; Government Policy ; Gynecology ; Health Care Services ; Health legislation ; Health policy ; Hospitals ; Legislation ; Medical practice ; Midwifery ; Midwives ; Ontario ; Physicians ; Pregnancy ; Regional policy ; Regulation ; Regulatory legislation ; Satisfaction ; Scope of practice ; Women ; Women's health ; Womens health</subject><ispartof>Canadian journal of political science, 2011-09, Vol.44 (3), p.483-505</ispartof><rights>Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association 2011</rights><rights>Canadian Political Science Association (Association canadienne de science politique) and/et Société québécoise de science politique</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c437t-2ab35490eac82dc93dc539bfb6e3c122320908e1d1facbc6b0952c8bfbd499073</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c437t-2ab35490eac82dc93dc539bfb6e3c122320908e1d1facbc6b0952c8bfbd499073</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/41300566$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S000842391100045X/type/journal_article$$EHTML$$P50$$Gcambridge$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>164,314,776,780,799,12824,27901,27902,33752,55603,57992,58225</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Paterson, Stephanie</creatorcontrib><title>Midwives, Women and the State: (De)Constructing Midwives and Pregnant Women in Ontario, Canada</title><title>Canadian journal of political science</title><description>Ontario's Midwifery Act came into effect on January 1, 1994, at a time of radical health care restructuring, marked by hospital closures and staffing cuts. In addition, feminist backlash was rampant in the popular media. Given these conditions, some have suggested that midwifery legislation was implemented because it aligned with the government's cost-cutting initiatives, while others have suggested that the government was responding to the dissatisfaction with obstetric practice outlined by a well-organized lobby. While these factors were no doubt important in the passing of the legislation, I offer a more critical reading of the policy texts, suggesting that the legislation and its enabling regulations problematize not only costs or client satisfaction but also the knowledge of midwives and the women they serve. In framing the issue as one of public safety, the policy ensemble introduced a new form of birthing expert—the expert midwife—reimposing a hierarchical relationship in the birthing process, serving to reify medical science and to objectify birthing women. In so doing, the legislation potentially silences claims for both professional and reproductive autonomy. Résumé. La Loi sur les sages-femmes de l'Ontario est entrée en vigueur le premier janvier 1994 au cours d'une période houleuse dans le domaine de la santé qui fut marquée par des fermetures d'hôpitaux et des réductions de la main-d'œuvre. De plus, à cette époque, les médias populaires avaient clairement adopté une position antiféministe. Étant donné cette conjoncture, on proposa dans quelques articles que cette loi fut adoptée parce qu'elle cadrait bien avec les priorités gouvernementales de coupures budgétaires, tandis que d'autres insistèrent que le gouvernement ne faisait que réagir au mécontentement à l'endroit de la pratique obstétricale exprimé par un groupe d'intérêts puissant. Ces facteurs ont sans doute joué un rôle important dans l'adoption de la loi, mais je propose, en contrepartie, une interprétation plus critique des textes de politiques publiques. J'avance que la loi et sa réglementation soulignent une problématique qui va au delà des coûts et de la satisfaction de la clientèle, englobant aussi le savoir des sages-femmes et celui de leurs clientes. En formulant le débat en termes de sécurité publique, la législation a instauré une nouvelle forme d'expertise – l'experte sage-femme – qui réimpose une hiérarchie professionnelle dans le domaine de l'accouchement, ce qui a pour effet de solidifier la position de la médecine traditionnelle et d'objectiver les femmes. Ce faisant, la loi risque de négliger les revendications d'autonomie des professionnelles et des partisanes de l'accouchement naturel.</description><subject>20th century</subject><subject>Birth</subject><subject>Canada</subject><subject>Client Satisfaction</subject><subject>Closure</subject><subject>Countermovements</subject><subject>Females</subject><subject>Feminism</subject><subject>Frame analysis</subject><subject>Government Policy</subject><subject>Gynecology</subject><subject>Health Care Services</subject><subject>Health legislation</subject><subject>Health policy</subject><subject>Hospitals</subject><subject>Legislation</subject><subject>Medical practice</subject><subject>Midwifery</subject><subject>Midwives</subject><subject>Ontario</subject><subject>Physicians</subject><subject>Pregnancy</subject><subject>Regional policy</subject><subject>Regulation</subject><subject>Regulatory legislation</subject><subject>Satisfaction</subject><subject>Scope of practice</subject><subject>Women</subject><subject>Women's health</subject><subject>Womens health</subject><issn>0008-4239</issn><issn>1744-9324</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><sourceid>PQHSC</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkV1LwzAYhYMoOKc_wAuheDVh1Xy2jXdSP2GiMEWvLGmazo41mUmq-O9t3VRQhF0l4TznvG84AOwieIggio_GEMKEYsIRam-UPa6BHoopDTnBdB30Ojns9E2w5dy0fcYxIz3wdF0Vb9WrcsPgwdRKB0IXgX9WwdgLr46Dwak6SI123jbSV3oSfPGf4K1VEy20X3orHdxoL2xlhkEqtCjENtgoxcypneXZB_fnZ3fpZTi6ubhKT0ahpCT2IRY5YZRDJWSCC8lJIRnheZlHikiEMcGQw0ShApVC5jLKIWdYJi1QUM5hTPpgsMidW_PSKOezunJSzWZCK9O4DOGERZjxiKyAYkQRYnhFFCYR7dD9X-jUNFa3f844jNoNk4S3EFpA0hrnrCqzua1qYd8zBLOuxuxPja1nb-GZOm_st4EiAiGLolYny0xR57YqJupn8v-pH67PpgA</recordid><startdate>20110901</startdate><enddate>20110901</enddate><creator>Paterson, Stephanie</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88F</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FQ</scope><scope>8FV</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>AABKS</scope><scope>ABSDQ</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DPSOV</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>KC-</scope><scope>M1Q</scope><scope>M2L</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>M3G</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQHSC</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>WZK</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20110901</creationdate><title>Midwives, Women and the State: (De)Constructing Midwives and Pregnant Women in Ontario, Canada</title><author>Paterson, Stephanie</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c437t-2ab35490eac82dc93dc539bfb6e3c122320908e1d1facbc6b0952c8bfbd499073</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>20th century</topic><topic>Birth</topic><topic>Canada</topic><topic>Client Satisfaction</topic><topic>Closure</topic><topic>Countermovements</topic><topic>Females</topic><topic>Feminism</topic><topic>Frame analysis</topic><topic>Government Policy</topic><topic>Gynecology</topic><topic>Health Care Services</topic><topic>Health legislation</topic><topic>Health policy</topic><topic>Hospitals</topic><topic>Legislation</topic><topic>Medical practice</topic><topic>Midwifery</topic><topic>Midwives</topic><topic>Ontario</topic><topic>Physicians</topic><topic>Pregnancy</topic><topic>Regional policy</topic><topic>Regulation</topic><topic>Regulatory legislation</topic><topic>Satisfaction</topic><topic>Scope of practice</topic><topic>Women</topic><topic>Women's health</topic><topic>Womens health</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Paterson, Stephanie</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Military Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Canadian Business & Current Affairs Database</collection><collection>Canadian Business & Current Affairs Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Philosophy Collection</collection><collection>Philosophy Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Politics Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Politics Collection</collection><collection>Military Database</collection><collection>Political Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>CBCA Reference & Current Events</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>History Study Center</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>Canadian journal of political science</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Paterson, Stephanie</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Midwives, Women and the State: (De)Constructing Midwives and Pregnant Women in Ontario, Canada</atitle><jtitle>Canadian journal of political science</jtitle><date>2011-09-01</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>44</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>483</spage><epage>505</epage><pages>483-505</pages><issn>0008-4239</issn><eissn>1744-9324</eissn><coden>CJPSBD</coden><abstract>Ontario's Midwifery Act came into effect on January 1, 1994, at a time of radical health care restructuring, marked by hospital closures and staffing cuts. In addition, feminist backlash was rampant in the popular media. Given these conditions, some have suggested that midwifery legislation was implemented because it aligned with the government's cost-cutting initiatives, while others have suggested that the government was responding to the dissatisfaction with obstetric practice outlined by a well-organized lobby. While these factors were no doubt important in the passing of the legislation, I offer a more critical reading of the policy texts, suggesting that the legislation and its enabling regulations problematize not only costs or client satisfaction but also the knowledge of midwives and the women they serve. In framing the issue as one of public safety, the policy ensemble introduced a new form of birthing expert—the expert midwife—reimposing a hierarchical relationship in the birthing process, serving to reify medical science and to objectify birthing women. In so doing, the legislation potentially silences claims for both professional and reproductive autonomy. Résumé. La Loi sur les sages-femmes de l'Ontario est entrée en vigueur le premier janvier 1994 au cours d'une période houleuse dans le domaine de la santé qui fut marquée par des fermetures d'hôpitaux et des réductions de la main-d'œuvre. De plus, à cette époque, les médias populaires avaient clairement adopté une position antiféministe. Étant donné cette conjoncture, on proposa dans quelques articles que cette loi fut adoptée parce qu'elle cadrait bien avec les priorités gouvernementales de coupures budgétaires, tandis que d'autres insistèrent que le gouvernement ne faisait que réagir au mécontentement à l'endroit de la pratique obstétricale exprimé par un groupe d'intérêts puissant. Ces facteurs ont sans doute joué un rôle important dans l'adoption de la loi, mais je propose, en contrepartie, une interprétation plus critique des textes de politiques publiques. J'avance que la loi et sa réglementation soulignent une problématique qui va au delà des coûts et de la satisfaction de la clientèle, englobant aussi le savoir des sages-femmes et celui de leurs clientes. En formulant le débat en termes de sécurité publique, la législation a instauré une nouvelle forme d'expertise – l'experte sage-femme – qui réimpose une hiérarchie professionnelle dans le domaine de l'accouchement, ce qui a pour effet de solidifier la position de la médecine traditionnelle et d'objectiver les femmes. Ce faisant, la loi risque de négliger les revendications d'autonomie des professionnelles et des partisanes de l'accouchement naturel.</abstract><cop>New York, USA</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><doi>10.1017/S000842391100045X</doi><tpages>23</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0008-4239 |
ispartof | Canadian journal of political science, 2011-09, Vol.44 (3), p.483-505 |
issn | 0008-4239 1744-9324 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1285625963 |
source | Jstor Complete Legacy; Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; Cambridge Journals; Sociological Abstracts |
subjects | 20th century Birth Canada Client Satisfaction Closure Countermovements Females Feminism Frame analysis Government Policy Gynecology Health Care Services Health legislation Health policy Hospitals Legislation Medical practice Midwifery Midwives Ontario Physicians Pregnancy Regional policy Regulation Regulatory legislation Satisfaction Scope of practice Women Women's health Womens health |
title | Midwives, Women and the State: (De)Constructing Midwives and Pregnant Women in Ontario, Canada |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-15T19%3A12%3A45IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Midwives,%20Women%20and%20the%20State:%20(De)Constructing%20Midwives%20and%20Pregnant%20Women%20in%20Ontario,%20Canada&rft.jtitle=Canadian%20journal%20of%20political%20science&rft.au=Paterson,%20Stephanie&rft.date=2011-09-01&rft.volume=44&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=483&rft.epage=505&rft.pages=483-505&rft.issn=0008-4239&rft.eissn=1744-9324&rft.coden=CJPSBD&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/S000842391100045X&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E41300566%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=906073889&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_cupid=10_1017_S000842391100045X&rft_jstor_id=41300566&rfr_iscdi=true |