IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v75y2012i4p709-716.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Women's childbirth preferences and practices in the United States

Author

Listed:
  • Miller, Amy Chasteen
  • Shriver, Thomas E.

Abstract

Over the past two decades, research on childbirth worldwide has documented women's varied perceptions of and decision-making regarding childbirth. Scholars have demonstrated the impact of medical authority, religion, perception of risk, and access to care providers on the decisions women make about where to have their babies and with whom. Virtually all research on how women make these choices, however, has focused outside the United States. To address this gap in the literature, we analyze data collected during 2004–2010 through 135 in-depth interviews with women in the U.S. who have had hospital births, homebirths with midwives, and homebirths without professional assistance to explore the factors that led them to the births they had. We supplement these interview data with archival analysis of birth stories and ethnographic data to offer additional insight into women's birth experiences. In our analysis, we utilize Pierre Bourdieu's concepts of “habitus” and “field” to examine the ways women's preferences emerge and how a sense of risk and safety shape their decision-making around pregnancy and parturition. Our findings indicate that while women's birth preferences initially emerge from their habitus, their birth practices are ultimately shaped by broader structural forces, particularly economic position and the availability of birth options.

Suggested Citation

  • Miller, Amy Chasteen & Shriver, Thomas E., 2012. "Women's childbirth preferences and practices in the United States," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(4), pages 709-716.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:75:y:2012:i:4:p:709-716
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.03.051
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953612003516
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.03.051?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bryant, Joanne & Porter, Maree & Tracy, Sally K. & Sullivan, Elizabeth A., 2007. "Caesarean birth: Consumption, safety, order, and good mothering," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 65(6), pages 1192-1201, September.
    2. Edwin van Teijlingen & Sirpa Wrede & Cecilia Benoit & Jane Sandall & Raymond DeVries, 2009. "Born in the USA: Exceptionalism in Maternity Care Organisation among High-Income Countries," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 14(42), pages 52-11, January.
    3. Namey, Emily E. & Lyerly, Anne Drapkin, 2010. "The meaning of "control" for childbearing women in the US," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(4), pages 769-776, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Baji, Petra & Rubashkin, Nicholas & Szebik, Imre & Stoll, Kathrin & Vedam, Saraswathi, 2017. "Informal cash payments for birth in Hungary: Are women paying to secure a known provider, respect, or quality of care?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 86-95.
    2. Smith-Oka, Vania, 2012. "Bodies of risk: Constructing motherhood in a Mexican public hospital," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(12), pages 2275-2282.
    3. Diamond-Brown, Lauren, 2016. "The doctor-patient relationship as a toolkit for uncertain clinical decisions," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 108-115.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tully, Kristin P. & Ball, Helen L., 2013. "Misrecognition of need: Women's experiences of and explanations for undergoing cesarean delivery," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 103-111.
    2. Pavlova, Milena & Hendrix, Marijke & Nouwens, Elvira & Nijhuis, Jan & van Merode, Godefridus, 2009. "The choice of obstetric care by low-risk pregnant women in the Netherlands: Implications for policy and management," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 93(1), pages 27-34, November.
    3. Altshuler, Anna L. & Ojanen-Goldsmith, Alison & Blumenthal, Paul D. & Freedman, Lori R., 2017. "A good abortion experience: A qualitative exploration of women's needs and preferences in clinical care," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 109-116.
    4. Gustavo De Santis & Valentina Tocchioni & Chiara Seghieri & Sabina Nuti, 2016. "Women’s satisfaction during pregnancy and at delivery in Tuscany (Italy)," Econometrics Working Papers Archive 2016_08, Universita' degli Studi di Firenze, Dipartimento di Statistica, Informatica, Applicazioni "G. Parenti".
    5. Sunita Panda & Cecily Begley & Deirdre Daly, 2018. "Clinicians’ views of factors influencing decision-making for caesarean section: A systematic review and metasynthesis of qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(7), pages 1-27, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:75:y:2012:i:4:p:709-716. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.