"她似乎只想让我受苦":针对黑人妇女的产科种族主义行为和侵犯生育权行为

IF 1.8 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH SSM. Qualitative research in health Pub Date : 2024-09-10 DOI:10.1016/j.ssmqr.2024.100479
Dorian S. Odems , Erica Czaja , Saraswathi Vedam , Na’Tasha Evans , Barbara Saltzman , Karen A. Scott
{"title":"\"她似乎只想让我受苦\":针对黑人妇女的产科种族主义行为和侵犯生育权行为","authors":"Dorian S. Odems ,&nbsp;Erica Czaja ,&nbsp;Saraswathi Vedam ,&nbsp;Na’Tasha Evans ,&nbsp;Barbara Saltzman ,&nbsp;Karen A. Scott","doi":"10.1016/j.ssmqr.2024.100479","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Studies that examine obstetric violence and mistreatment during perinatal care demonstrate that Black women experience higher levels of harm and abuse than other racialized groups. Yet these gender-based concepts do not fully recognize the intersectional gender-and race-based harms that Black women experience within the context of quality, safety, and human rights violations in the U.S. healthcare system.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We performed qualitative secondary analysis from Black women participants in the Giving Voice to Mothers (GVtM) study (n = 304). Primary data collection for the GVtM survey spanned from 2016 to 2017, and our analysis occurred in 2023, focusing on the interpretation of open-ended responses to three categories of inquiry: worst experiences with perinatal care, experiences of being pressured to undergo medical interventions, and desired revisions to birthing experiences. We employed a deductive approach and applied two analytic frameworks – obstetric racism and the Black Birthing Bill of Rights (BBBR)– to categorize Black women's narratives of harm during perinatal care as quality, safety, and human rights violations.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Black women described perinatal care experiences with considerable violations of the BBBR, including disrupted time with babies, racially discordant care, and unaffordable care. These experiences illustrated all six domains of obstetric racism.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>This study contributes to an emerging body of Black feminist approaches to knowledge production in obstetric patient safety, emphasizing the critical intersection of gender and race. Furthermore, this study underscores the value of using Black-women-defined frameworks with typologies to interpret the distinct experiences of Black women instead of the more limited gender-based concepts of obstetric violence, mistreatment, and respectful maternity care that lack historical context and contemporary implications of anti-Black racism and misogynoir.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":74862,"journal":{"name":"SSM. Qualitative research in health","volume":"6 ","pages":"Article 100479"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S266732152400088X/pdfft?md5=8f8f28cf9adae780fdd94d1164ad705a&pid=1-s2.0-S266732152400088X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“It seemed like she just wanted me to suffer”: Acts of obstetric racism and birthing rights violations against Black women\",\"authors\":\"Dorian S. Odems ,&nbsp;Erica Czaja ,&nbsp;Saraswathi Vedam ,&nbsp;Na’Tasha Evans ,&nbsp;Barbara Saltzman ,&nbsp;Karen A. Scott\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ssmqr.2024.100479\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Studies that examine obstetric violence and mistreatment during perinatal care demonstrate that Black women experience higher levels of harm and abuse than other racialized groups. Yet these gender-based concepts do not fully recognize the intersectional gender-and race-based harms that Black women experience within the context of quality, safety, and human rights violations in the U.S. healthcare system.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We performed qualitative secondary analysis from Black women participants in the Giving Voice to Mothers (GVtM) study (n = 304). Primary data collection for the GVtM survey spanned from 2016 to 2017, and our analysis occurred in 2023, focusing on the interpretation of open-ended responses to three categories of inquiry: worst experiences with perinatal care, experiences of being pressured to undergo medical interventions, and desired revisions to birthing experiences. We employed a deductive approach and applied two analytic frameworks – obstetric racism and the Black Birthing Bill of Rights (BBBR)– to categorize Black women's narratives of harm during perinatal care as quality, safety, and human rights violations.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Black women described perinatal care experiences with considerable violations of the BBBR, including disrupted time with babies, racially discordant care, and unaffordable care. These experiences illustrated all six domains of obstetric racism.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>This study contributes to an emerging body of Black feminist approaches to knowledge production in obstetric patient safety, emphasizing the critical intersection of gender and race. Furthermore, this study underscores the value of using Black-women-defined frameworks with typologies to interpret the distinct experiences of Black women instead of the more limited gender-based concepts of obstetric violence, mistreatment, and respectful maternity care that lack historical context and contemporary implications of anti-Black racism and misogynoir.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74862,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"SSM. Qualitative research in health\",\"volume\":\"6 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100479\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S266732152400088X/pdfft?md5=8f8f28cf9adae780fdd94d1164ad705a&pid=1-s2.0-S266732152400088X-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"SSM. Qualitative research in health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S266732152400088X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SSM. Qualitative research in health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S266732152400088X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

引言研究围产期护理过程中的产科暴力和虐待行为的研究表明,黑人妇女遭受的伤害和虐待程度高于其他种族群体。然而,这些基于性别的概念并没有充分认识到黑人妇女在美国医疗保健系统的质量、安全和人权受到侵犯的背景下所经历的基于性别和种族的交叉伤害。方法我们对 "为母亲发声"(GVtM)研究的黑人妇女参与者(n = 304)进行了二次定性分析。GVtM 调查的原始数据收集时间跨度为 2016 年至 2017 年,我们的分析时间为 2023 年,重点解读了对以下三类调查的开放式回答:最糟糕的围产期护理经历、被迫接受医疗干预的经历以及希望对分娩经历进行的修改。我们采用了演绎法,并应用了两个分析框架--产科种族主义和黑人生育权利法案(BBBR)--将黑人妇女讲述的围产期护理伤害归类为质量、安全和人权侵犯。这些经历说明了产科种族主义的所有六个领域。结论本研究为新兴的黑人女权主义者产科患者安全知识生产方式做出了贡献,强调了性别和种族的重要交集。此外,本研究强调了使用黑人妇女定义的框架和类型来解释黑人妇女独特经历的价值,而不是使用更有限的基于性别的产科暴力、虐待和尊重产妇护理的概念,这些概念缺乏历史背景和反黑人种族主义和厌恶女性的当代影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
“It seemed like she just wanted me to suffer”: Acts of obstetric racism and birthing rights violations against Black women

Introduction

Studies that examine obstetric violence and mistreatment during perinatal care demonstrate that Black women experience higher levels of harm and abuse than other racialized groups. Yet these gender-based concepts do not fully recognize the intersectional gender-and race-based harms that Black women experience within the context of quality, safety, and human rights violations in the U.S. healthcare system.

Methods

We performed qualitative secondary analysis from Black women participants in the Giving Voice to Mothers (GVtM) study (n = 304). Primary data collection for the GVtM survey spanned from 2016 to 2017, and our analysis occurred in 2023, focusing on the interpretation of open-ended responses to three categories of inquiry: worst experiences with perinatal care, experiences of being pressured to undergo medical interventions, and desired revisions to birthing experiences. We employed a deductive approach and applied two analytic frameworks – obstetric racism and the Black Birthing Bill of Rights (BBBR)– to categorize Black women's narratives of harm during perinatal care as quality, safety, and human rights violations.

Results

Black women described perinatal care experiences with considerable violations of the BBBR, including disrupted time with babies, racially discordant care, and unaffordable care. These experiences illustrated all six domains of obstetric racism.

Conclusion

This study contributes to an emerging body of Black feminist approaches to knowledge production in obstetric patient safety, emphasizing the critical intersection of gender and race. Furthermore, this study underscores the value of using Black-women-defined frameworks with typologies to interpret the distinct experiences of Black women instead of the more limited gender-based concepts of obstetric violence, mistreatment, and respectful maternity care that lack historical context and contemporary implications of anti-Black racism and misogynoir.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
163 days
期刊最新文献
Perspectives of Palestinian physicians on the impact of the Gaza War in the West Bank Prenatal care in urban China: Qualitative study on challenges and coping mechanisms Ableism in mental healthcare settings: A qualitative study among U.S. adults with disabilities A methodological review of solicited diaries as a qualitative tool in health research in low- and middle-income countries Reconciling market and moral logics on a minimum wage: Supermarket work in Australia during the first two years of the SARS-COV-2 pandemic
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1