Follow Up: Responding to Hilary

After reading the two articles about childbirth, I was thoroughly confused about whose stance I should believe. Since I do not know that much about childbirth, I felt I had much to learn in terms of the basic facts. Gawande opened my eyes to the history of childbirth over the centuries, as well as the complications and such that can come from birthing a child. Goer’s article harshly critiqued Gawande’s article and proposed that Gawande contradicted himself as well as came to the wrong conclusion. In the end, I was absolutely confused and I simply do not know what to believe. All I can base my personal feelings on the matter is on those that I know that have gone through pregnancy and childbirth before.

Gawande’s article, “The Schore-How Childbirth Went Industrial”, discussed the importance that modernization of obstetrics has had on women. This modernization has worked in women’s favor in resulting in less risky birthing experiences. After Gawande discussed the complications that can occur during the birth process I actually became frightened because it definitely opened my eyes to the wide array of problems that can occur. But, Gawande goes on to say that birthing has become a lot less complicated over the years and through technological advancements, doctors have been able to save many more lives, mother and baby. With cesarean sections, the mortality rate for newborns has become lower. Gawande states, “Scheduled C-sections have lower maternal mortality than vaginal delivery” (Gawande, 10). This confuses me because he promotes c-sections and discusses how they are so successful but then says, “We are losing our connection to yet another natural process of life. And we are seeing the waning of the art of childbirth” (Gawande, 10). So, Gawande left me with a bit of confusion as to where he stands on the matter.

On the other hand, Goer’s article, “How Childbirth Went Industrial: A Deconstruction”, discusses the importance of natural childbirths. Goer makes no bones about his aversion to cesarean sections and is clearly in favor of vaginal births. Goer expresses the importance of midwives and doula and how they can even be more knowledgeable and successful than obstetricians. Goer attempts to disprove Gawande’s theories of c-sections and provides factual evidence to prove that c-sections are not as safe as Gawande states. Goer states, “A 2003 systematic review of the research found that women were more likely to die from complications directly attributable to cesarean surgery compared with women birthing vaginally” (Goer, 4). Now what do we believe? This statement contradicts Gawande’s ideas completely. Who is correct? Goer also emphasizes the importance of having all women “have access to the safest vaginal birth practices. We should not expect them to choose between vaginal birth with avoidable harms and cesarean section” (11).

What I have concluded from these articles is that despite the varying views on cesarean sections and vaginal births, it is important for women to have the say as to what they want to do for them and their baby. It is all about personal opinion and what is best for the individual. Society should not judge what decision they choose to make. Also, as some of my group members have mentioned previously, I truly think that it is not about the birthing process, it is about the joint health of the mother and child. The most important goal of childbirth is to get the baby out as safely as possible and to make sure the mother is safe.