Paternity Ward
Nicholas D. Kristof - Crisis in the Operating Room:
Outside, her husband, Allahdita, was grieving but philosophical. “It is God’s will,” he said, shrugging. “There is nothing we can do.”
That’s incorrect. If men had uteruses, “paternity wards” would get resources, ambulances would transport pregnant men to hospitals free of charge, deliveries would be free, and the Group of 8 industrialized nations would make paternal mortality a top priority. One of the most lethal forms of sex discrimination is this systematic inattention to reproductive health care, from family planning to childbirth — so long as those who die are impoverished, voiceless women.
Comments
Dan McKeown
My first reaction to this is confusion and a little bit of anger. I will try to make a better argument after reading the entire article but I cannot think for just one second that they are serious. It makes no sense to me that men would actively choose to allow women and their children to die in birth due to lack of funding. Like I said, I need to read the whole thing but I feel like calling ‘bs’ on that posting.
Alexander Micek
I understand your reaction, Dan. I think it’s less an active intent to harm women than it is a passive (albeit despicable) acceptance of the status quo. The perception seems to be “childbirth is complicated and frequently deadly for child and/or mother, and there is little we can (or should) do to change that.”
The author of the piece goes on to make a very interesting point — he follows a couple expecting a baby — the male’s side of the family wanted to get the expectant mother to the hospital. However, the expectant mother’s own family, who traditionally make these “health-care” decisions, was strongly against the hospital, seeing it as an extravagance.
This widespread, potentially harmful disdain of modern medicine as an extravagance seems to be culturally ingrained.
Mykala +1
Also interesting, I think, is the turn women in our culture now seem to be making in the other direction. I can’t tell you how many books and articles I’ve seen speaking to the “medicalization” of childbirth in the US, and statistics about increased c-sections and episiotomies and pregnant women feeling like they’re being “treated” for their “condition”. The heart of the issue as I see it is that a woman’s body generally does a good job of housing a baby, and that some of our medical practices are beginning to be implemented out of convenience for both doctors and patients, rather than out of necessity for the safety of mom and baby.
I’m not sure where I stand personally in all of it, but there sure is an interesting dynamic between having ridiculous access to medical care and what wind up doing with it, and other regions of the world being accustomed to such unimaginable conditions that we are essentially over-equipped to help with at this point. It’s insanity.
Right now, I’m just thankful to have medical insurance that will cover me if I end up with said condition! :) Thanks, U of M!
Alexander Micek
I agree, Mrs. Mykala — scheduling childbirth with a c-section as a default response to pregnancy, without a justifiable medical reason, seems an odd choice for childbirth. Certainly, I wouldn’t be here without c-sections, but that’s because my Mom isn’t physically big enough to have babies any other way (and it’s beside the point).
I think your statement of people treating pregnancy like a “condition” is very interesting, and true.