really bogus info in my textbook

[conniebonnie]

ok ,
im currently in a child-development class. I was reading ahead inmy text book to the birth section and found this (and i quote) in refernece to birth before the 20th century.

- the midwife who presided over the event had no formal training; she offered "advice, massages, potions, irrigations, and talismans." Salves made of fat of viper, gall of eel, powdered hoof of donkey. tongue of chameleon, or skin of snake or hare might be rubbed on the prospective mother's abdomen to ease her pain or hasten her labor; but "the cries of the mother during labor were considered to be as natural as those of the baby at birth" (Fontanel &d'Harcourt, 1997)
Given the lack of accurate knowledge about female anatomy and the birth process, the midwives' ministrations sometimes did more harm than good. A 16th centurery textbook instructed midwives to stretch and dialate the membranes of teh genital parts and cut or break them with her fingernails, to urge the patient to go up and down the stairs screaming at the top of her lungs, to help her bear down by pressing on her belly, and to pull out the placenta immediately after birth. (Fontanel &d'Harcourt, 1997)-

and then later, when talking about how we have reduced the risks of childbirth it says

" The development of the science of obstetrics early in the 19th century professionalized childbirth, especially in urban settings. Most deliveries still occurred at home and women were on hand to help and offer emotional support, but a male physician was usually in charge. with surgical instruments ready in case of trouble. Midwives were now given training and obstetric manuals were widely disseminated"

As a doula and an aspiring midwife (just waiting for an apprenticeship) and also just a general informed person, this sounds ludicrous. But it is in my textbook, my last edition 2006 text book. And i am just not sure how exactly to go about that. I did print off a copy of "Witches, Midwives, and Nurses- A History of Women Healers" by Barbara Ehrenreich and Deirdre English ( http://tmh.floonet.net/articles/witches.html) But really. Come on.

Any thoughts?

[jlpetitte]

Thats too bad. It must depend on the text book because in my class we used a developmental psych textbook that seemed very midwife friendly, I think it was by David Schaffer. It even talked about the benefits of drug-free birth and babywearing-- its seemed sorta AP to me.

[krystyn33]

There's plenty in Lying In-A History of Childbirth in America (by Wertz I think) which would contradict your textbook.

[dewi]

Most textbooks suck!
That is why primary sources such as research, journals, and conferences are vital to the education of all people in the medical fields.
Tell your professor about this misinformation in the text.

[turtlewomyn]

Originally Posted by conniebonnie

Given the lack of accurate knowledge about female anatomy and the birth process, the midwives' ministrations sometimes did more harm than good. A 16th centurery textbook instructed midwives to stretch and dialate the membranes of teh genital parts and cut or break them with her fingernails, to urge the patient to go up and down the stairs screaming at the top of her lungs, to help her bear down by pressing on her belly, and to pull out the placenta immediately after birth. (Fontanel &d'Harcourt, 1997)-

I think this description could fit modern day obstetrics in some ways. Episiotomies for instance (except they are using surgical instruments and not their fingernails) are still used by doctors with all their patients, regardless of need, even though the research shows that this may be doing more harm than good.

Where the heck did the midwives get tongue of chameleon? Where were these midwives in the old world or new world? Are they talking about true chameleons or anoles?? Sounds like a bunch of bogus to me.

[Calidris]

Originally Posted by conniebonnie

ok ,
A 16th centurery textbook instructed midwives to stretch and dialate the membranes of teh genital parts and cut or break them with her fingernails, to urge the patient to go up and down the stairs screaming at the top of her lungs, to help her bear down by pressing on her belly, and to pull out the placenta immediately after birth. (Fontanel &d'Harcourt, 1997)-

Well, the same way you have some bad text books now, I'm sure there were some pretty sucky textbooks around in the 16th C too.
Think about it, who would have written those books? The village midwife was probably illiterate, the book would have been written by men. Who maybe interviewed midwives and misunderstood, or propagated whatever rumours they needed to.
The part about going up and down the stairs sounds pretty good, and the first part sounds a bit like perinial (sp?) massage, possibly misunderstood...

[conniebonnie]

i talked to her, she basically said that it didnt matter if it was true and that we were studying THIS text books information.
ok. dokay. no thinking for ourselves. no actual truth.
heck i want come tongue of chameleon.

[cottonwood]

This is terrible. Yes, midwives did often (and still do) interfere with normal childbirth. But the implication here is that midwifery is inherently quackery and obstetrics has brought us out of the dark ages. Um, no.

As an aside, I'd like to know the sources for these claims -- I suppose the textbook doesn't list them -- because textbooks of course are an objective authority in themselves! Ugh, school, but I won't get off on that tangent. Well, except to say that your instructor's attitude is outrageous even for a typical school. Does she allow discussion in class? I'd be very vocal about questioning the assumptions in the book.

[Ironica]

Originally Posted by conniebonnie

i talked to her, she basically said that it didnt matter if it was true and that we were studying THIS text books information.
ok. dokay. no thinking for ourselves. no actual truth.

Wow. I would so speak to the department head about that attitude.

[Nicole77]

Originally Posted by Ironica

Wow. I would so speak to the department head about that attitude.

Yeah, I agree about that. I am not some child to be pandered to and I would definitely have a sit down with the dept head if a professor knew the information being presented in class was incorrect and still refused to correct it. I would also make a point of slipping in a lot of accurate information sneakily phrased as questions. "But isn't it true...?" and the like.

[Ruthla]

It's a shame your professor is being so obstinate about using THIS textbook and not being open to other ideas. Is the birth section a huge part of this class, or is it just mentioned briefly? Will it even be mentioned in class or only read at home? If it's not even going to be mentioned in class, it may not be worth fighting over.

Is the professor open to discussions of modern-day midwifery, even if s/he's not willing to look at other historical information?

I would contact the textbook manufacturer about this. This misinformation goes a lot further than just this one class- and if the textbook gets updated, it will help a LOT more people than just getting one teacher to change.

[Peppamint]

Wow, that's awful. I recently read Birth: The Surprising History of How We Are Born and it would contradict that nicely. Great book IMO.

It's a shame that your instructor is so inflexible, and that your classmates may leave with a misunderstanding of traditional midwifery.