IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v285y2021ics0277953621006286.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Countervailing powers in the labor room: The doula–doctor relationship in the United States

Author

Listed:
  • Adams, Crystal
  • Curtin-Bowen, Mica

Abstract

How do health professionals with fundamentally different philosophies toward health, and different status levels, manage power in their work relationships? This paper argues that taking a negotiated order interactionist approach, which contends that the social order shapes behavior but is continuously negotiated through social interactions, and synthesizing it with a countervailing powers perspective can yield insight into the power dynamics between health professionals. It focuses on the birth field, with attention to the relationship between two very different types of birth professionals: obstetricians and doulas. Unlike doctors, who maintain a dominant place in health care and subscribe to a biomedical perspective of birth, doulas hold a low-status position and take a holistic approach toward birth, which may cause conflict in the labor room. In-depth interviews with 43 birth doulas based in the US (May–July 2018) found that the doula–doctor relationship is a complex story of power, deference, and countervailing responses. Doulas reported that doctors are more receptive to them now than in the past but that this is an outcome of creative countervailing responses involving deferential maneuvers and direct challenges to physician authority. Doulas’ strategic management of their relationships with health professionals has allowed them entry to the hospital, permitting them to represent a holistic voice in the labor room. A minority of doulas have begun to develop relationships with doctors that constitute a collaborative approach toward birth care, indicating that changes in standard care are possible. By revealing how a subordinate actor can challenge physicians and effect change in care, this study contributes to scholarship seeking to understand the nature of unequal relationships between health professionals in a context of biomedical dominance.

Suggested Citation

  • Adams, Crystal & Curtin-Bowen, Mica, 2021. "Countervailing powers in the labor room: The doula–doctor relationship in the United States," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 285(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:285:y:2021:i:c:s0277953621006286
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114296
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953621006286
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114296?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. Almeida, Joana & Gabe, Jonathan, 2016. "CAM within a field force of countervailing powers: The case of Portugal," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 73-81.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Brosnan, Caragh, 2017. "Alternative futures: Fields, boundaries, and divergent professionalisation strategies within the Chiropractic profession," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 83-91.

    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:285:y:2021:i:c:s0277953621006286. 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.