Time, risk and midwife practice: The vaginal examination

Health, Risk and Society

Volumn 16, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 84-100

  Scamell, Mandie ^a   Stewart, Mary ^b  

^a CITY UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

midwifery practice; partogram; risk; vaginal examination

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMMUNITY CARE; EARLY INTERVENTION; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; HUMAN; INTRAPARTUM CARE; LABOR STAGE; MATERNAL CARE; MIDWIFE ATTITUDE; NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE; PELVIC EXAMINATION; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PREGNANT WOMAN; PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK MANAGEMENT;

EID: 84896718893     PISSN: 13698575     EISSN: 14698331     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/13698575.2013.874549     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Alaszewski, A., 2003. Risk, clinical governance and best value: restoring confidence in health and social care. In: S. Pickering and J. Thompson, eds. Clinical governance and best value: meeting the modernisation agenda. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone, 171-182.
2. Alaszewski, A. and Brown, P., 2012. Making health policy: a critical introduction. Cambridge: Polity Press.
3. Armstong, D., 1995. The rise of surveillance medicine. Sociology of health & illness, 17 (3), 393-404.
4. Bergstrom, L., et al., 1992. 'You'll feel me touching you, sweetie': vaginal examinations during the second stage of labour. Birth, 19 (1), 10-18.
5. Brown, B. and Crawford, P., 2003. The clinical governance of the soul: 'deep management' and the self-regulating subject in integrated community mental health teams. Social science & medicine, 56 (1), 67-81.
6. Brown, P., Heyman, B., and Alaszewski, A., 2013. Time-framing and health risks. Health, risk & society, 15 (6-7), 479-488.
7. Bryman, A., 2004. Social research methods. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
8. Department of Health, 1997. The new NHS modern and dependable. Cm 3807. London: HMSO.
9. Downe, S. and Dykes, F., 2009. Counting time in pregnancy and labour. In: C. McCourt, ed. Childbirth, midwifery and concepts of time. New York: Berghahn Books, 61-83.
10. Flynn, A., 2000. Clinical governance and governmentality. Health, risk & society, 4 (2), 155-170.
11. Groeschel, N. and Glover, P., 2001. The partograph used daily but rarely questioned. Australian journal of midwifery: professional journal of the Australian college of midwives incorporated, 14 (3), 22-27.
12. Gwyn, R., 2002. Communicating health and illness. London: Sage.
13. Harrison, S. and Wood, B., 2000. Scientific-bureaucratic medicine and UK Health Policy. Review of policy research, 17 (4), 25-42.
14. Lam, A., 2000. Tacit knowledge, organizational learning and societal institutions: an integrated framework. Organisational studies, 21 (3), 487-513.
15. Lavender, T., Hart, A., and Smyth, R., 2008. Effect of partogram use on outcomes for women in spontaneous labour at term. Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 8 (4), 1-22.
16. Lipsky, M., 2001. Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public services. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
17. Naples, N., 2003. Feminism and method: Ethnography, discourse analysis, and activist research. New York: Routledge.
18. National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence, 2007. Intrapartum care. Care of healthy women and their babies during childbirth. NICE Clinical Guideline 55. London: NICE.
19. Parker, M., 2007. Ethnography/ethics. Social science & medicine (1982), 65 (11), 2248-2259.
20. Polanyi, M., 1966. The tacit dimension. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
21. The Royal Society, 1992. Risk analysis, perception and management. Report of a Royal Society Study Group. London: The Royal Society.
22. Russell, K., 2007. Mad, bad or different? Midwives experiences of supporting normal birth in obstetric led units. British journal of midwifery, 5 (3), 128-131.
23. Ruston, A., 2006. Interpreting and managing risk in a machine bureaucracy: professional decision making in NHS Direct. Health, risk & society, 8 (3), 257-271.
24. Scamell, M., 2011. The swan effect in midwifery talk and practice: a tension between normality and the language of risk. Sociology of health & illness, 33 (7), 987-1001.
25. Scamell, M. and Alaszewski, A., 2012. Fateful moments and the categorisation of risk: midwifery practice and the ever narrowing window of normality. Health, risk & society, 14 (2), 207-221.
26. Schmid, V. and Downe, S., 2010. Midwifery skills for normalising unusual labours. In: D. Walsh and S. Downe, eds. Essential midwifery practice. Intrapartum care. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 159-190.
27. Shepherd, A. and Cheyne, H., 2012. The frequency and reasons for vaginal examinations in labour. Women and birth, 26 (1), 49-54.
28. Simonds, W., 2002. Watching the clock: keeping time during pregnancy, birth, and postpartum experiences. Social science & medicine, 55 (4), 559-570.
29. Stacey, J., 1988. Can there be a feminist ethnography? Women's studies international forum, 11 (1), 21-27.
30. Stewart, M., 2004. Midwives discourse on vaginal examination in labour. Thesis (PhD). University of the West of England, Bristol.
31. Stewart, M., 2005. 'I'm just going to wash you down': sanitizing the vaginal examination. Journal of advanced nursing, 51 (6), 587-594.
32. Traynor, M., 1996. A literary approach to managerial discourse after the NHS reforms. Sociology of health & illness, 18 (3), 315-340.
33. Walsh, D., 2010. Labour rhythms. In: S. Downe and D. Walsh, eds. Essential midwifery practice: intrapartum care. 1st ed. London: Wiley Blackwell, 63-80.
34. Weir, L., 2006. Pregnancy, risk and biopolitics. London: Routledge.
35. Wells, S., 1997. Priorities, 'street level bureaucracy' and the community mental health team. Health & social care in the community, 5 (5), 333-342.