2004
Volume 25 Number 4
  • ISSN: 1388-3186
  • E-ISSN: 2352-2437

Abstract

Abstract

Based on autoethnographic material and feminist theory, such as care ethics and epistemic (in)justice studies, we expose four forms of epistemic injustice in reproductive care in the Netherlands: hermeneutical injustice, testimonial injustice, willful hermeneutical ignorance, and gaslighting. These forms of injustice rest on deeply rooted systems and their associated assumptions and on practices that produce and reproduce this injustice. We draw upon care ethics to suggest alternative practices that may counter these epistemic forms of obstetric violence, by explicating the (embodied) voice of the care receiver in reproductive care.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5117/TVGN2022.4.004.HASS
2022-12-01
2023-01-31
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Baur, V.E., Van Nistelrooij, A.A.M., & Vanlaere, L. (2017). The sensible health care professional: A care ethical perspective on the role of caregivers in emotionally turbulent practices. Medicine, Health Care, and Philosophy, 20(4), 483–493. doi:10.1007/s11019-017-9770-5
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bohren, M.A., Vogel, J.P., Hunter, E.C., Lutsiv, O., Makh, S.K., Souza, … Gülmezoglu, A.M. (2015). The mistreatment of women during childbirth in health facilities globally: A mixed-methods systematic review. PLoS Medicine, 12(6), e1001847; discussion e1001847. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001847
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bourgault, S. (2020). Epistemic injustice, face-to-face encounters and caring institutions. International Journal of Care and Caring, 4(1), 91–107. doi:10.1332/239788219X15682725266696
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Buitendijk, S. (2010). De stem van vroede vrouwen (1e ed.). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Carel, H., & Kidd, I.J. (2017). Epistemic injustice in medicine and healthcare. In I.J.Kidd, J.Medina, & G.Pohlhaus Jr (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of epistemic injustice (1e ed., pp. 336–346). Abingdon: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781315212043-33
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Chadwick, R. (2020). Practices of silencing. In C.Pickles, & J.Herring (Eds.), Childbirth, vulnerability and law (1e ed., pp. 30–48). Londen: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780429443718-3
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Cohen Shabot, S. (2016). Making loud bodies feminine: A feminist-phenomenological analysis of obstetric violence. Human Studies, 39(2), 231–247. 10.1007/s10746-015-9369-x
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Cohen Shabot, S. (2017). Laboring with Beauvoir. In L.Hengehold, & N.Bauer (Eds.), A Companion to Simone de Beauvoir (pp. 134–145). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. doi:10.1002/9781118795996.ch11
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Cohen Shabot, S. (2020a). Amigas, sisters: we’re being gaslighted. In C.Pickles, & J.Herring (Eds.), Childbirth, vulnerability and law (1e ed., pp. 14-29). Londen: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780429443718-2
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Cohen Shabot, S. (2020b). Why ‘normal’ feels so bad: Violence and vaginal examinations during labour – a (feminist) phenomenology. Feminist Theory, 22(3), 443–463. doi:10.1177/1464700120920764
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Cohen Shabot, S. (2021). “You are not qualified – leave it to us”: Obstetric violence as testimonial injustice. Human Studies, 44(4), 635–653. doi:10.1007/s10746-021-09596-1
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Conrad, P. (2007). The Medicalization of Society. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Dahan, O., & Cohen Shabot, S. (2022). Not just mechanical birthing bodies: Articulating the impact of imbalanced power relationships in the birth arena on women’s subjectivity, agency, and consciousness. Mind, Culture and Activity, ahead-of-print, 1-13. doi:10.1080/10749039.2022.2110262
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Dalmiya, V. (2016). Care-based epistemology and the comparative feminist context. In V.Dalmiya, Caring to know (pp. 1–39). Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199464760.003.0001
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Davis, A.Y. (2016). Freedom is a constant struggle: Ferguson, Palestine, and the foundations of a movement. Chicago: Haymarket Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Davis, D.A. (2019). Obstetric racism: The racial politics of pregnancy, labor, and birthing. Medical Anthropology, 38(7), 560–573. doi:10.1080/01459740.2018.1549389
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Engster, D. (2005). Rethinking care theory: The practice of caring and the obligation to care. Hypatia, 20(3), 50–74. doi:10.1111/j.1527-2001.2005.tb00486.x
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Fisher, B., & Tronto, J.C. (1990). Toward a feminist theory of caring. In E.K.Abel, & M.Nelson (Eds.), Circles of care (pp. 35–62). Albany: SUNY Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Fricker, M. (2007). Epistemic Injustice. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198237907.001.0001
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Hamington, M. (2012). Care ethics and corporeal inquiry in patient relations. International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics, 5(1), 52–69. doi:10.2979/intjfemappbio.5.1.52
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Harris (2021). (Caring for) the world that must be undone. In D.Woodly, R.H.Brown, et al. The politics of care. Contemporary Political Theory, 20, 890–925.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Kaba, M. (2021). We do this ‘til we free us: Abolitionist organizing and transforming justice. Chicago: Haymarket Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Kidd, I.J., Medina, J., & Pohlhaus Jr, G. (2017). The Routledge handbook of epistemic injustice. Abingdon: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Kingma, E. (2015). Research proposal (part B1): Better understanding the metaphysics of pregnancy: Organisms, identity, personhood & persistence – short version.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Kittay, E.-F. (1999). Vulnerability and the moral nature of dependency relations. In E.-F.Kittay, Love’s labor (pp. 67–92). Abingdon: Routledge. doi:10.4324/978131502121810
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Leget, C., Van Nistelrooij, I., & Visse, M. (2019). Beyond demarcation: Care ethics as an interdisciplinary field of inquiry. Nursing Ethics, 26(1), 17–25. doi:10.1177/0969733017707008
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Lugones, M. (2003). Playfulness, “world”-traveling and loving perception. In M.Lugones, Pilgrimages/peregrinajes: Theorizing coalition against multiple oppressions. (pp. 78–100). Oxford: The Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. McKinnon, R. (2017). Allies behaving badly. The Routledge handbook of epistemic injustice (1e ed., pp. 167–174). Abingdon: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781315212043-16
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Medina, J. (2012). Hermeneutical injustice and polyphonic contextualism: Social silences and shared hermeneutical responsibilities. Social Epistemology, 26(2), 201–220. doi:10.1080/02691728.2011.652214
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Mohanty, C.T. (2003). Feminism without borders (4e druk). Durham: Duke University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Morton, C.H., Henley, M.M., Seacrist, M., & Roth, L.M. (2018). Bearing witness: United States and Canadian maternity support workers’ observations of disrespectful care in childbirth. Birth (Berkeley, Calif.), 45(3), 263–274. doi:10.1111/birt.12373
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Narruhn, R., & Clark, T. (2019). Epistemic injustice: A philosophical analysis of women’s reproductive health care in a Somali-American community. Advances in Nursing Science, Publish Ahead of Print (1), 86–100. doi:10.1097/ANS.0000000000000283
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Pohlhaus, G. (2012). Relational knowing and epistemic injustice: Toward a theory of willful hermeneutical ignorance. Hypatia, 27(4), 715–735. doi:10.1111/j.1527-2001.2011.01222.x
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Rich, A. (1979). On lies, secrets and silence. New York: WW Norton & Company.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Sadler, M., Santos, M.J., Ruiz-Berdún, D., Rojas, G.L., Skoko, E., Gillen, P., & Clausen, J. A. (2016). Moving beyond disrespect and abuse: Addressing the structural dimensions of obstetric violence. Reproductive Health Matters, 24(47), 47–55. doi:10.1016/j.rhm.2016.04.002
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Seijmonsbergen-Schermers, A., Thompson, S., Feijen-De Jong, E., Smit, M., Prins, M., Van den Akker, T., & De Jonge, A. (2021). Understanding the perspectives and values of midwives, obstetricians and obstetric registrars regarding episiotomy: Qualitative interview study. BMJ Open, 11(1), e037536. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-037536
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Tronto, J. (1993). Moral boundaries. New York: Taylor & Francis Group.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Tronto, J.C. (2013). Caring democracy. New York: NYU Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Van der Pijl, Marit S.G, Verhoeven, C.J.M., Verweij, R., Van der Linden, T., Kingma, E., Hollander, M.H., & De Jonge, A. (2022). Disrespect and abuse during labour and birth amongst 12,239 women in the Netherlands: A national survey. Reproductive Health, 19(1), 1–16. doi:10.1186/s12978-022-01460-4
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Van der Waal, R. (2018). Expecting to conceive of an ontology of pregnancy from the perspective of the maternal (masterscriptie). Universiteit van Amsterdam.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Van der Waal, R., Mayra, K., Horn, A., & Chadwick, R. (2022). Obstetric violence: An intersectional refraction through abolition feminism. Feminist Anthropology, 1-24.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Van der Waal, R., Mitchell, V., van Nistelrooij, I., & Bozalek, V. (2021). Obstetric violence within students’ rite of passage: The reproduction of the obstetric subject and its racialized (m)other. Agenda, 35(3), 36–53. doi:10.1080/10130950.2021.1958553
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Van der Waal, R., & Van Nistelrooij, I. (2022). Reimagining relationality for reproductive care: Understanding obstetric violence as “separation”. Nursing Ethics, 9697330211051000. doi:10.1177/09697330211051000
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Van Hassel, R. (2021). Longread – Obstetrisch geweld. Het vroede geluid. Beschikbaar op: https://hetvroedegeluid.nl/?p=721&fbclid=IwAR3Mnt33Y2l4alyfMsCBJuxh-1Y--RCeJwjJKQ7TZzDZR4gB-ICpiXHYLME
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Van Nistelrooij, I. (2022). The fluidity of becoming. The maternal body in feminist views of care, worship and theology. In I.van Nistelrooij, M.Sander-Staudt, & M.Hamington (Eds.), Care ethics, religion and spiritual traditions (159–194). Leuven: Peeters. https://www.peeters-leuven.be/pdf/9789042946552.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Villarmea, S. (2020). When a uterus enters the room, reason goes out the window. In C.Pickles, & J.Herring (Eds.), Women’s birthing bodies and the law: Unauthorised medical examinations, power and vulnerability (pp. 63–78). Oxford: Hart Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Villarmea, S. (2021). Reasoning from the uterus: Casanova, women’s agency, and the philosophy of birth. Hypatia, 36(1), 22–41. doi:10.1017/hyp.2020.45
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Villarmea, S., & Kelly, B. (2020). Barriers to establishing shared decision-making in childbirth: Unveiling epistemic stereotypes about women in labour. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 26(2), 515–519. doi:10.1111/jep.13375
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Wall, S. (2008). Easier said than done: Writing an autoethnography. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 7(1), 38–53. doi:10.1177/160940690800700103
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Wolf, A. B. (2013). Metaphysical violence and medicalized childbirth. The International Journal of Applied Philosophy, 27(1), 101–111. doi:10.5840/ijap20132719
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Woodly, D., Brown, R.H., et al. (2021). The politics of care. Contemporary Political Theory, 20, 890–925.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Young, I.M. (2005). On female body experience. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/0195161920.001.0001
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.5117/TVGN2022.4.004.HASS
Loading
/content/journals/10.5117/TVGN2022.4.004.HASS
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error