Barbara Ehrenreich & Deirdre English's For Her Own Good: Two Centuries of the Experts Advice to Women, is an excellent account of the rise of modern medicine on the Harvard/Johns Hopkins model, particularly as they impacted obstetrics & gynecology. Certainly obstetrics pushed the midwife away (for a time, at least) & caused women needless harm with repeat c-sections & birthing tongs that looked as though they had come from a Medieval torture chamber.

Still ... there was one comment the authors made that gave me pause. In writing about the development of midwifery, the authors allow that although the midwife could do little good in cases of breach presentation, placenta previa, abruptio placentae, pre-eclampsia, etc: "At least she didn't do much harm".

So I, a male who has never experienced childbirth (& who believes it's disrespectful when fathers-to-be say "we're pregnant"!), was left to wonder: we live in an age when the above complications are no longer virtual death sentences for the mother-to-be. They can be treated, mother & baby saved. Was it possible to get to this place without the "science" of [male dominated] obstetrics?

No doubt there were needless bumps along the way. For decades obstetricians were taught not to take women seriously. Labor & delivery was a mechanized process operating at the convenience of the MD. But the science proved to be sound. Now it's fine that women are taking over & reclaiming childbirth. That's as it should be.

Bottom line, however, is that it seemed as though the art & science of midwifery had plateaued; a new, or modified approach was needed.