«Sociology of space». The layout of birthing rooms as material culture of immanent obstetric paradigms and its repercussion in terms of humanising care
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3989/arbor.2020.796n2013Keywords:
Sociology, architecture, space, cultures of childbirth, humanising careAbstract
From the perspective of the «sociology of space», this study will explore the connections that exist between ideological factors (paradigms of representation of childbirth), systems of clinical organization (cultures of childbirth) and architectural developments (spatial typologies of birthing rooms), and their repercussions in terms of humanising care. To this end, a twenty-four-month ethnographic investigation was carried out in six birthing rooms of the state health service in a region of southern Spain. The research technique was participant observation, accumulating a total of three hundred and twenty-four hours of analysis. The results show how architectural arrangements are closely linked to pre-existing obstetric paradigms and cultures, tending from a technocratic perspective, organically, toward a fragmentation of the healthcare space that dehumanises the process, and from holistic-humanistic worldviews, in terms of a continuum, toward a space-care reintegration that contributes to humanisation.
Downloads
References
Augé, M. (2009). Los no lugares. Espacios del anonimato. Una antropología de la sobremodernidad. Barcelona: Gedisa.
Benoit, C., Zadoroznyj, M., Hallgrimsdottir, H., Treloar, A. y Taylor, K. (2010). Medical dominance and neoliberalisation in maternal care provision: The evidence from Canada and Australia. Social Science & Medicine, 71 (3), pp. 475-487. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.04.005 PMid:20570030 PMCid:PMC4445451
Bermejo, J. C. (2014). Humanizar la asistencia sanitaria. Bilbao: Desclée de Brouwer.
Blázquez, M. I. (2009). Ideologías y prácticas de género en la atención sanitaria del embarazo, parto y puerperio: el caso del área 12 de la Comunidad de Madrid [Tesis doctoral inédita]. Universidad Rovira i Virgili: Tarragona.
Campbell, R. y Macfarlane, A. (1987). Where to be born? Oxford: National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit.
Chamberlain, G. (2007). From Witchcraft to Wisdom: A History of Obstetrics and Gynaecology in the British Isles. London: Royal College Obstetricians and Gynaecologists.
Davis-Floyd, R. (2001). The technocratic, humanistic, and holistic paradigms of childbirth. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, 75 (1), pp. 5-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-7292(01)00510-0
Davis, D. y Walker, K. (2010). The corporeal, the social and space/ place: exploring intersections from a midwifery perspective in New Zealand. Gender, Place and Culture, 17 (3), pp. 377-391. https://doi.org/10.1080/09663691003737645
Deleuze, G. (1993). The Fold: Leibniz and the Baroque. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
DeWalt, K. M. y DeWalt, B. R. (2011). Participant observation. A guide for fieldworkers. Maryland: AltaMira Press.
Ehrenreich, B. y English, D. (1978). For Her Own Good: Two Centuries of the Experts' Advice to Women New York: Anchor Books. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005721-197911000-00014
Fannin, M. (2003). Domesticating birth in the hospital "family-centered" birth and the emergence of "homelike" birthing rooms. Antipode, 35 (3), pp. 513-535. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8330.00337
Foucault, M. (1977). La vie des hommes infâmes. Les Cahiers du Chemin, 29, pp. 12-29. https://doi.org/10.3406/grif.1976.1074
Foureur, M., Davis, D. L., Fenwick, J., Leap, N., Iedema, R., Forbes, I. F. y Homer, C. S. E. (2010). The relationship between birth unit design and safe, satisfying birth: Developing a hypothetical model. Midwifery, 26 (5), pp. 520-525. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2010.05.015 PMid:20692742
González Álvarez, D. y Alonso González, P. (2014). De la representación cultural de la otredad a la materialización de la diferencia: arqueología contemporánea de la domesticidad entre los vaqueiros d'alzada y los maragatos (España). Chungara. Revista de Antropología Chilena, 46 (4), pp. 607-623. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0717-73562014000400005
Haber, A. F. (2011). La casa, las cosas y los dioses. Arquitectura doméstica, paisaje campesino y teoría local. Córdoba: Encuentro Grupo Editor.
Harte, J. D., Sheehan, A., Stewart, S. C. y Foureur, M. (2016). Childbirth supporters' experiences in a built hospital birth environment: Exploring inhibiting and facilitating factors. HERD: Health Environments Research & Design Journal, 9 (3), pp. 135-161. https://doi.org/10.1177/1937586715622006 PMid:26794236
Hernández Garre, J. M. (2011). El parto hospitalario e intervencionista. Una construcción social de la maternidad [Tesis doctoral inédita]. Universidad de Murcia: Murcia.
Hernández Garre, J. M. y Echevarría, P. (2014). La parte negada del parto institucionalizado. Explorando sus bases antropológicas. Revista de Dialectología y Tradiciones Populares, 69 (2), pp. 327-348. https://doi.org/10.3989/rdtp.2014.02.004
Humphrey, M. D. (1995). The Obstetrics Manual. New York: McGraw-Hill
Ingold, T. (2000). The Perception of the Environment. Essays on Livelihood, Dwelling and Skill. London: Routledge.
Irwin, S. y Jordan, B. (1987). Knowledge, practice and power: court-ordered caesarean sections. Medical Anthropology Quarterly, 1 (3), pp. 319-334. https://doi.org/10.1525/maq.1987.1.3.02a00060 PMid:11659066
Jordan, B. (1993). Birth in four cultures. A Crosscultural Investigation of Childbirth in Yucatan, Holland, Sweden and the United States. Montreal: Eden Press Women's Publications.
Jorgensen, D. L. (1989). Participant Observation: A Methodology for human studies. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412985376
Kabakian-Khasholian, T., Campbell, O., Shediac-Rizkallah, M. y Ghorayeb, F. (2000). Women's experiences of maternity care: satisfaction or passivity? Social Science & Medicine, 51, pp. 103-113. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0277-9536(99)00443-8
Kitzinger, S. (2000). Rediscovering Birth. London: Little Brown.
Kitzinger, S. (2004). The new experience of childbirth. London: Orion Books.
Kitzinger, S. (2006). Birth Crisis. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203968727
Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientifíc revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor- Network-Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Leach, E. R. (1976). Culture and Communication: The logic by which symbols are connected. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511607684
Le Breton, D. (1994). Lo imaginario del cuerpo en la tecnociencia. Revista Española de Investigaciones Sociológicas, 68, pp. 197-210. https://doi.org/10.2307/40183763
Lepori, B. (1994). Freedom of movement in birth places. Children's Environments, 11 (2), pp. 1-12.
Lordon, F. (2006). L'Intérét Souverain: Essai d'Anthropologie Économique Spinoziste. Paris: Découverte.
Machin, D. y Scamell, M. (1997). The experience of labour: Using ethnography to explore the irresistible nature of the bio-medical metaphor during labour. Midwifery, 13 (2), pp. 78-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0266-6138(97)90060-7
Mansfield, B. (2007). The social nature of natural childbirth. Social Science & Medicine, 66 (5), pp. 1084- 1094. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.11.025 PMid:18162274
Martin, E. (1987). The Woman in the Body. Boston: Beacon Press.
Mauss, M. (1970). The gift: forms and functions of exchange in archaic societies. London: Cohen & West LTD.
McClain, C. (1975). Ethno-obstetrics in Ajijic. Anthropological Quarterly, 48 (1), pp. 38-56. https://doi. org/10.2307/3316856 https://doi.org/10.2307/3316856
Miller, D. (1998). Material Cultures: Why Some Things Matter. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203167014
Montes, M. J. (2007). Las culturas del nacimiento. Representaciones y prácticas de las mujeres gestantes, comadronas y médicos [Tesis doctoral inédita]. Univesitat Rovira i Virgili: Tarragona.
Moore, K. L. (1973). The Developing Human:Clinically Oriented Embryology. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company
Olsen, O. (1997). Meta-analysis of the safety of home birth. Birth. Issues in perinatal care, 24 (1), pp. 4-13. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-536X.1997.tb00330.x PMid:9271961
Pizzini, F. (1981). Il parto in ospedale: tragitto della donna e rituali dell'istituciones. En Pizzini, F. (ed.). Sulla scena del parto: luoghi, figure, pratiche. Milano: Franco Angeli Editore. pp. 129-147.
Pizzini, F. (1989). The expectant mother as patient: a research study in Italian maternity wards. Health Promotion International, 4 (1), pp. 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/4.1.1
Rose, M. (2011). Secular materialism: a critique of earthly theory. Journal of Material Culture, 16, pp. 107-129. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359183511401496
Scheper-Hughes, N. (1993). Death Without Weeping: The Violence of Everyday Life in Brazil. Berkeley: University of Carolina Press. https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520911567
Stoller, N. (1974). Forced labor: maternity care in the United States. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Taylor, S. J. y Bogdan, R. (1984). Introduction to qualitative research methods: the search for meaning. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan
Tew, M. (1985). Place of birth and perinatal mortality. The Journal of the Royal College of General Pratitioners, 35, pp. 390-394.
Tew, M. (1990). Safer childbirth: A Critical History of Maternity Care. New York: Oxford University Press. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2975-4
Tilley, C. (1991). Material Culture and Text: The Art of Ambiguity. London: Routledge.
Wagner, M. (2006). Born in the USA: How a broken maternity system must be fixed to put women and children first. Berkeley: University of California Press. https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520941748
World Health Organization. (1985). Appropriate technology for birth. Lancet, 326 (8452), pp. 436-437. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(85)92750-3
World Health Organization. (1997). Care in normal birth: a practical guide. Birth, 24 (2), pp. 121-123. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-536X.1997.tb00352.x
Zarankin, A. (1999). Casa tomada, sistema, poder y vivienda doméstica. En: Zarankin, A. y Acuto, F. (eds.). Sed non satiata, Teoría social en la Arqueología Latinoamericana Contemporánea. Buenos Aires: Ediciones del Tridente, pp. 239-272.
Recursos en línea
Estrategia de atención al parto normal en el Sistema Nacional de Salud. Informe sobre la Atención al parto y Nacimiento en el Sistema Nacional de Salud. Observatorio de Salud de la Mujer (OSM). Ministerio de Sanidad, Servicios Sociales e Igualdad. Diciembre 2012. [En línea]. Disponible en: https://www.mscbs.gob.es/organizacion/sns/planCalidadSNS/pdf/InformeFinalEAPN_revision8marzo2015.pdf
Guía de Práctica Clínica sobre la Atención al Parto Normal. Ministerio de Sanidad y Política Social. Octubre 2010. [En línea]. Disponible en: https://portal.guiasalud.es/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/GPC_472_Parto_Normal_Osteba_compl.pdf
Iniciativa Parto Normal. Documento de consenso. Federación de Asociaciones de Matronas de España (FAME). Observatorio de Salud de la Mujer (OSM). Ministerio de Sanidad y Consumo. [En línea]. Disponible en: https://orbananos.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/ipn_libro.pdf
Maternidad hospitalaria. Estándares y recomendaciones. Ministerio de Sanidad y Política Social. 2009. [En línea]. Disponible en https://www.mscbs.gob.es/organizacion/sns/planCalidadSNS/docs/AHP.pdf
Protocolos Asistenciales en Obstetricia. Puerperio normal y patológico. Sociedad Española de Obstetricia y Ginecología (SEGO). 2003. [En línea]. Disponible en: https://www.uv.es/jjsanton/Parto/08SEGOasistenciaparto.pdf
Recomendaciones sobre la asistencia al parto. Sociedad Española de Obstetricia y Ginecología (SEGO). Enero 2008. [En línea]. Disponible en: https://www.elpartoesnuestro.es/sites/default/files/recursos/documents/sego_recomend_asist_parto_2008_sustituye_protocolo_2003.pdf
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
© CSIC. Manuscripts published in both the printed and online versions of this Journal are the property of Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, and quoting this source is a requirement for any partial or full reproduction.
All contents of this electronic edition, except where otherwise noted, are distributed under a “Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International” (CC BY 4.0) License. You may read the basic information and the legal text of the license. The indication of the CC BY 4.0 License must be expressly stated in this way when necessary.
Self-archiving in repositories, personal webpages or similar, of any version other than the published by the Editor, is not allowed.
