Literature DB >> 16927112

Negotiating public and professional interests: a rhetorical analysis of the debate concerning the regulation of midwifery in Ontario, Canada.

Philippa Spoel1, Susan James.   

Abstract

This article investigates the uneasy process of integrating midwifery's alternative, women-centered model of childbirth care within the medically-dominated healthcare system in Canada. It analyses the impure processes of rhetorical identification and differentiation that characterized the debate about how to regulate midwifery in Ontario by examining a selection of submissions from diverse health care groups with vested interest in the debate's outcome. In divergent ways, these groups strategically appeal to the value of the "public interest" in order to advance professional concerns. The study considers the implications of this rhetorical process for re-defining midwifery's distinctive professional identity in relation to other health professions, to the state, and to the women for whom midwives care. Likewise, it suggests the relevance of rhetorical analysis for understanding the discursive formation and re-formation of health models, values, and professions in Western culture.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16927112     DOI: 10.1007/s10912-006-9016-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Humanit        ISSN: 1041-3545


  5 in total

1.  Licensed lay midwifery and the medical model of childbirth.

Authors:  R Weitz; D Sullivan
Journal:  Sociol Health Illn       Date:  1985-03

2.  Integrating lay and nurse-midwifery into the U.S. and Canadian health care systems.

Authors:  I L Bourgeault; M Fynes
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1997-04       Impact factor: 4.634

3.  State authority, medical dominance, and trends in the regulation of the health professions: the Ontario case.

Authors:  D Coburn
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1993-07       Impact factor: 4.634

Review 4.  The technocratic body: American childbirth as cultural expression.

Authors:  R E Davis-Floyd
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1994-04       Impact factor: 4.634

  5 in total
  2 in total

1.  Textual standardization and the DSM-5 "common language".

Authors:  Patty A Kelly
Journal:  J Med Humanit       Date:  2014-06

2.  Public voices in pharmaceutical deliberations: negotiating "clinical benefit" in the FDA's Avastin Hearing.

Authors:  Christa B Teston; S Scott Graham; Raquel Baldwinson; Andria Li; Jessamyn Swift
Journal:  J Med Humanit       Date:  2014-06
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.