Choosing Cesarean

Feminism and the politics of childbirth in the United States

Bibliographic Data

ID5086441
AuthorsKatherine Beckett (0000-0002-5523-087X, University of Washington, corresponding author)
Year2005
Volume6
Issue3
Pages251-275
Publication date2005-12-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueFeminist Theory (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1464-7001 • E-ISSN: 1741-2773
PublisherSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/1464700105057363
OpenAlexW2014906500
LanguageEN
Citations received53
References cited40

This article uses the US debate over elective Cesarean section to re-consider some of the more contentious issues raised in feminist debates about childbirth. Three waves of feminist commentary and critique in the United States are analysed in light of the ongoing debate over whether women should be able to choose Cesarean for non-medical reasons. I argue that the alternative birth movement's essentialist and occasionally moralistic rhetoric is problematic, and the idea that some women's preference for high-tech obstetrics is the result of a passive 'socialization' into 'dominant values' is theoretically inadequate. On the other hand, the invocation of women's choice and appreciation of high-tech childbirth serves as a weak foundation for a feminist perspective on childbirth. By limiting their analysis to the rhetorical and discursive nature and functions of 'the medical' and 'the natural', poststructuralist critics of the alternative birth movement obscure the connection of these discourses to practices that have very different consequences for maternal and infant health and, most importantly, for the consumption of health care resources

Childbirth · Essentialism · Health care · Political science · Pregnancy · Rhetoric · Rhetorical question · Sociology · Gender Studies · Law · Maternal and Perinatal Health Interventions · Reproductive Health and Contraception · Reproductive Health and Technologies

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub