Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Women were never meant to give birth on their backs

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 50 posts

Re: Women were never meant to give birth on their backs

#41

Post by Dazzler5648 »

fxtentacle wrote: post #31

Maybe this is a UK problem? Or the author just doesn't have kids? (and has no experience?) German hospital beds for giving birth are at a 45 degree angle, which to me looked like a good compromise between "the mother can safely take a nap when she is tired" and "gravity will help you". Also, they have these thingys to put your legs up, so the overall posture is pretty close to squatting. (But with a back rest to prev…

Keep guessing. There are other reasons most women end up in the beds. (I’ve worked L&D and am a woman.)

Re: Women were never meant to give birth on their backs

#42

Post by Dazzler5648 »

bl4kers wrote: post #26
ViktorRay wrote: post #4

I wonder what it would take to get hospitals to change how women give birth based on this scientific evidence.

In the U.S. at least the incentives are perverse. Probably what would actually move the needle is a test trial with results showing it's more cost and resource effective

Mmmm… when they see their profits from medical interventions go down when women start trusting their bodies, they’ll nix that trial STAT.

Re: Women were never meant to give birth on their backs

#43

Post by [deleted] »

Dazzler5648 wrote: post #41
fxtentacle wrote: post #31

Maybe this is a UK problem? Or the author just doesn't have kids? (and has no experience?) German hospital beds for giving birth are at a 45 degree angle, which to me looked like a good compromise between "the mother can safely take a nap when she is tired" and "gravity will help you". Also, they have these thingys to put your legs up, so the overall posture is pretty close to squatting. (But with a back rest to prev…

Keep guessing. There are other reasons most women end up in the beds. (I’ve worked L&D and am a woman.)

[deleted]

Re: Women were never meant to give birth on their backs

#44

Post by vharuck »

hgoel wrote: post #22
stavros wrote: post #13

This article mixes the science with unnecessarily gendered language. It turns "a lying down position helps the doctor" to "men decided women should be on their backs" and "one pervert king liked watching women give birth, therefore somehow that's why". Can't we just focus on the scientific advantages and not try to shoehorn sexism into everything?

The claim also just doesn't make a lot of sense. So, a king or doctor decided women in France should be made to give birth on their backs a couple hundred years ago. Even if we accept that this would've been enough for a complete shift in how women give birth within France, how does that spread across the world? I'd be interested in if these claims fit with places where "traditional" births/care systems are more comm…

>Even if we accept that this would've been enough for a complete shift in how women give birth within France, how does that spread across the world?

France was renowned as being at the frontier of medicine. At least, according to the New Orleans Pharmacy Museum (which I'd recommend visiting for anyone in the area). People around the world looked to it for cutting edge techniques.

Re: Women were never meant to give birth on their backs

#45

Post by didibus »

stavros wrote: post #13

This article mixes the science with unnecessarily gendered language. It turns "a lying down position helps the doctor" to "men decided women should be on their backs" and "one pervert king liked watching women give birth, therefore somehow that's why". Can't we just focus on the scientific advantages and not try to shoehorn sexism into everything?

> and not try to shoehorn sexism into everything

I don't think it's shoehorned in this case, it's scientific to also look at the historical context and causes.

The article tries to explain two things, what scientifically are the pros/cons of the position, but also tries to explain why it's the default position that is used in most hospitals and have been for a long time now, and if it's true that it's due to either convenience to the men (at the time) physicians, or weird pleasure of the King, than in both cases it would have been "for men".

That said, I'll grant you it doesn't seem to really know what caused the back position to become predominent, it seems more to only mention two possible cause of many more and leaves much to be desired in a thorough root cause, and so it's probably partially thrown in just for better engagement with the article :p

Re: Women were never meant to give birth on their backs

#46

Post by 1659447091 »

IAmBroom wrote: post #39
1659447091 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This article mixes the science with unnecessarily gendered language. It turns "a lying down position helps the doctor" to "men decided women should be on their backs" and "one pervert king liked watching women give birth, therefore somehow that's why". Looking more into the history of it, I find the "gendered language" to instead be important factual context. It was also not the author who wrote about the king or o…

> The article says nothing about "a lying down position helps the doctor". > Mauriceau, who wrote a book "that helped establish obstetrics as science"[0], thought of pregnancy as illness, and that it would be "more convenient for the male physician attending". You contradict yourself in the very next sentence.

>> "a lying down position helps the doctor".

>> "more convenient for the male physician attending".

> You contradict yourself in the very next sentence.

"helping" a doctor do their function is not the same as being "convenient" for a doctor. Especially in the context of "a lying down position", which makes "helps the doctor" imply a functionally needed assist in the child birth. Being "convenient" is further expanded on in my last paragraph, and it in no way has anything to do with functionally "helping" the child birth.

Re: Women were never meant to give birth on their backs

#47

Post by hulitu »

stavros wrote: post #13

This article mixes the science with unnecessarily gendered language. It turns "a lying down position helps the doctor" to "men decided women should be on their backs" and "one pervert king liked watching women give birth, therefore somehow that's why". Can't we just focus on the scientific advantages and not try to shoehorn sexism into everything?

> Can't we just focus on the scientific advantages and not try to shoehorn sexism into everything.

Why are you trying to destroy journalism ? The guy is trying to make a point and he needed some "metaphors". If he only presents scientific facts, the article will be short and boring. /s

Re: Women were never meant to give birth on their backs

#49

Post by 1718627440 »

watwut wrote: post #36
bad_username wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why legacy media keep losing audience and trust.

No, that is because they sanewash trump and republicans constantly.

Not everything is about US domestic politics (although these certainly influence other countries).

Re: Women were never meant to give birth on their backs

#50

Post by andrewflnr »

stavros wrote: post #34
andrewflnr wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

90% of the article is about the scientific advantages. You've chosen to fixate on the "sexism" part which is, as other commenters pointed out, mainly there to explain why things are done this way today at all. I don't think it's the article that's the problem.

No you're right, the subtitle that says "It's all because of a Frenchman who decided it was more convenient – for men" was definitely me reading between the lines, I can't believe I even attributed a gendered slant.

Pardon me for paying attention to the actual article instead of the subtitle likely written by someone else. And it's not as if you can credibly claim it's not relevant, since the first thing we want to know about any stupid practice is why it got started. So unless you have evidence that it's incorrect, you're just getting offended at... actual facts.
Post reply on HN