Archive for July, 2012

Support Needs of Mothers Who Experience Postpartum Psychosis and Their Partners: A Qualitative Research Review

July 31st, 2012 by avatar

This is part one of a two part series on the support needs of women who experience postpartum psychosis, and their partners and is written by regular contributor Walker Karraa.  Part two will run next week. – SM

Support Needs of Mothers Who Experience Postpartum Psychosis and Their Partners (Doucet, Letourneau, & Blackmore, 2012), is a study published in the Journal of Obstetric, Gynecological & Neonatal Nursing (JOGNN) has offering new qualitative data regarding the support needs of mothers who experience postpartum psychosis (PP).

It is important to note that this is the first published study looking directly at the support needs, preferences, and access to support for women who have experienced PP and their partners, and the importance of qualitative research in deepening our understanding of maternal health.

Creative Commons Image: Pamela Machado

As you know, qualitative research attempts to make explicit the lived experience of a phenomenon. Rather than quantifying an objective symptom in empirical methods and deducing what an experience is through external measurements, qualitative research methods put the lived experience of the individual center stage, and develop inductive strategies for learning about the human experience. In this study, for example, the authors use semi-structured interviews from mothers and partners to find themes in the content that may suggest more effective prevention and treatment strategies. Listening to mothers and using their subjective experience of PP and the needs they had in recovery offered a quality of information (data) that traditional quantitative data does not, and could not—by the very nature of its design and purpose. We cannot measure motherhood. But we can learn to listen to motherhood through multiple perspectives in order to learn its meanings and mitigate our advocacy.

Postpartum Psychosis: Some Background               


Postpartum psychosis affects 1-2 women per 1,000 births globally, and while rare, it is an extremely severe postpartum mood disorder (Kendell, Chalmers, & Platz, 1987; Munk-Olsen, Laursen, Pedersen, Mors, & Mortensen, 2006). This most debilitating illness occurs in all cultures, affecting mothers across socioeconomic, ethnic, and religious communities (Kumar, 1994).


Symptoms of postpartum psychosis are sudden in onset, usually occurring within 48 hours to 2 weeks following birth. PP represents “psychiatric emergency and warrants hospitalization” (Beck & Driscoll, 2009, p. 47). If left untreated, some dire potential outcomes include:

  • 5% of women who experience PP commit suicide (Appleby, Mortensen, & Faragher, 1998; Knopps, 1993).
  • 2%-4% are at risk of harming their infants (Knopps, 1993; Spinelli, 2004).
  • PP has a 90% recurrence rate (Kendell et al., 1987).

According to the American Psychiatric Association (APA, 2000, p. 332), symptoms of PP include:delusions, hallucinations, disorganized speech, and grossly disorganized or catatonic behavior occurring within 4 weeks following childbirth, and that is not accounted for by other medical conditions, substance use, or mood disorders with psychotic features. Current research demonstrates that contrary to popular beliefs, PP is often the result of either bipolar disorder or major depressive disorder with psychotic features, and there is little frequency of PP caused by reactive psychosis or schizophrenia (McGorry & Connell, 1990).

Study Review

The goal of the recent JOGNN study Support Needs of Mothers Who Experience Postpartum Psychosis and Their Partners (Doucet, Letourneau, & Blackmore, 2012) was: “To explore the perceived support needs and preferences of women with postpartum psychosis and their partners” (p.236).  A multisite, exploratory, qualitative descriptive design was implemented using a purposive sample of nine mothers (Canada, n = 7, United States, n = 2) and eight fathers (Canada, n = 7, United States, n = 1). Data were collected through one-on-one, in-depth, semi-structured, interviews lasting 45-120 minutes. Partners were interviewed separately. All interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim, and then analyzed using inductive thematic analysis in six phases based on the methods of Braun and Clarke (2006), thematic content regarding support for mothers emerged in the categories of (a) support needs; (b) support preferences; (c) accessibility to support; and (d) barriers to support.

Mothers’ Support Needs

Instrumental, Informational, and Emotional

Doucet et al., (2012) concluded that “all mothers reported the need for instrumental, informational, emotional, and affirmational support” (p. 238. Bottom line, the mothers needed good information about their illness, good information about taking care of an infant, and physical in home assistance.

Generic support of parenting needs included information on caring for newborn, and physical assistance with house cleaning and infant care. Following hospitalization for PP, the majority of participants described wanting 24-hour support at home. Some wanted help with physical needs of meal preparation, bathing, and assistance with confusion, disorientation, memory loss. Help with night feeding, holding, etc. were significant, as one mother noted:

It was helpful having people come over and play with him and take care of him, and if I am in that manic state I can just carry on and get it out of my system. (p.239)

Mothers reported needing reassurance that the cause of their illness was biological, that they would recover:

The turning point was when I talked to someone who had gone through the exact same thing as me. The fact that she turned out okay and went on to have a happy good life with other kids was reassurance that I could get through this. (p. 238)

Women also wanted specific information on PP including:

  • treatment options
  • medication safety when breastfeeding
  • long term prognosis
  • risk of relapse with future pregnancies
  • community support

Mothers’ Support Preferences

Mothers wanted clinical information from professionals, and emotional, affirmational, and physical support from informal networks—such as peers, partners, and families.  There was a “strong preference” (p. 239) to receive physical help with baby from family, rather than formal sources such as in home nurses, etc.

All women wanted one-to-one, face-to-face support from a professional, at least once a week immediately after symptoms began. Once symptoms had improved, mothers reported preferring group support in face-to-face format, with mothers who had experienced postpartum mental health issues, and facilitated by someone with experience in PP, such as a professional, or a woman who had recovered from PP. They wanted to bring their babies to group sessions.

Access to Support

All mothers obtained access to a general psychiatric unit for immediate support with symptoms, but it is important to note they preferred a unit that specialized in postpartum mood disorders.

They felt they did not belong on a general unit, and did not receive specialized support. Most disturbingly, none of the women were able to see their infants, as is standard protocol in general psychiatric units, and found this extremely painful and hindered their recovery.

Barriers to Recovery

Barriers to recovery for the mothers in the study included the perception of health care providers as too clinical, uncaring, and having restricted their access to families. Isolation in the hospital, not seeing care provider, or feeling rushed in the appointment were also reported care-provider barriers. Family lack of knowledge about PP was reported as a barrier to recovery. One participant shared:

If my husband had a support group for new fathers to deal with a psychotic wife, it would have changed everything. He would have been far more compassionate had he known about my illness. He needed tools to deal with a mentally ill wife. (p. 241)

Finally, mothers in the study identified the lack of education regarding the differences between postpartum psychosis and other postpartum mood and anxiety disorders in family, peers and friends as a significant barrier to their own recovery. I think it is fair to offer considerations in approaching the topic so that together we will build a dialogue of difference, a conversation of consideration for how childbirth professionals process perinatal psychiatric illness, and learn to overcome fear through knowing.

In the next submission the findings from the fathers and partners will be reviewed, and considerations for childbirth professionals will be discussed.


Appleby, L., Mortensen, P., & Faragher, E. (1998). Suicide and other causes of mortality after post-partum psychiatric admission. British Journal of Psychiatry, 173, 209-211.

Beck, C. & Driscoll, J. (2006). Postpartum mood and anxiety disorders: A clinician’s guide. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77-101. doi:10.191/1478088706qp063oa

Doucet, S., Letourneau, N., & Blackmore, E. R. (2012). Support needs of mothers who experience postpartum psychosis and their partners. Journal of Obstetric, Gynecological & Neonatal Nursing, 41(2), 236-245.

Kendell, R., Chalmers, J., & Platz, C. (1987). Epidemiology of puerperal psychosis. British Journal of Psychiatry, 150, 662-673.

Knopps, G. (1993). Postpartum mood disorders: A startling contrast to the joy of birth. Postgraduate Medicine, 93, 103-116.

Kumar, R. (1994). Postnatal mental illness: A transcultural perspective. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 29, 250-264. doi:10.1007/BF00802048

McGorry, P., & Connell, S. (1990). The nosology and prognosis of puerperal psychosis: A review. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 31, 519-534.

Munk-Olsen, T., Laursen, T., Pederson, C., Mors, O., & Mortensen, P. (2006). New parents and mental disorders: A population-based register study. Journal of the American Medical Association, 296(21), 2582-2589. doi:10.1001/jama.296.21.2582

Spinelli, M. (2004). Maternal infanticide associated with mental illness: Prevention and promise of saved lives. American Journal of Psychiatry, 161(9), 1548-1557.

About Walker Karraa

Regular contributor Walker Karraa is currently the President of PATTCh, an organization dedicated to the Prevention and Treatment of Traumatic Childbirth. Walker is a doctoral student at Institute of Transpersonal Psychology, a certified birth doula, freelance writer, and maternal mental health advocate.  She holds an MA degree in Clinical Psychology from Antioch University Seattle, and a BA and MFA degree in dance from UCLA.  Walker is a contributor to the Lamaze sites, www.givingbirthwithconfidence.org and www.scienceandsensibility.com.  She lives in Sherman Oaks, California with her husband, and two children.

Depression, Maternal Mental Health, Maternal Mortality, Maternal Mortality Rate, New Research, Perinatal Mood Disorders, Postpartum Depression, Postparum depression, Pregnancy Complications, Prenatal Illness, Uncategorized , , , , , , , , ,

Midwifery Organizations Band Together in Support of Normal Physiologic Birth

July 27th, 2012 by avatar

In May of this year, three leading midwifery organizations, American College of Nurse Midwives (ACNM), Midwives Alliance of North America (MANA) and National Association of Certified Professional Midwives (NACPM) jointly released a statement titled “Supporting Healthy and Normal Physiologic Childbirth; A Consensus Statement by ACNM, MANA and NACPM,” intended for health care professionals and policymakers.  This strongly worded statement supports healthy and normal physiologic childbirth for for U.S. women. It is logical that the three main U.S. midwifery organizations coordinated in preparing this statement, as midwives are the gatekeepers of normal birth for low risk women.   The purpose of the consensus statement, which was developed by a joint task force appointed from members of the three midwifery organizations was to:

  • Provide a succinct definition of normal physiologic birth;
  • Identify measurable benchmarks to describe optimal processes and outcomes reflective of normal physiologic birth;
  • Identify factors that facilitate or disrupt normal physiologic birth based on the best available evidence;
  • Create a template for system changes through clinical practice, education, research, and health policy; and
  • Ultimately improve the health of mothers and infants, while avoiding unnecessary and costly interventions.

A normal physiologic labor and birth is one that is powered by the innate human capacity of the woman and fetus. This birth is more likely to be safe and healthy because there is no unnecessary intervention that disrupts normal physiologic processes.  Some women and/or fetuses will develop complications that warrante medical attention to assure safe and healthy outcomes.  However, supporting the normal physiologic processes of labor and birth, even in the presence of such complications, has the potential to enhance best outcomes for mother and infant.

These three organizations recognize the current state of U.S. maternity care and acknowledge how technology and interventions are being commonly used despite the lack of scientific evidence supporting routine applications. (Sakala, 2008.)  Some of the interventions cited including pitocin being used to induce or augment more than half of all pregnant women’s labors. (Declercq, Sakala, 2006.)  The cesarean rate in the United States is more than 33%. (Martin,Hamilton, Ventura 2011.) This cesarean rate is not without risks for both mothers and babies with the original cesarean birth but also recognizes the complications to subsequent pregnancies and birth.  The organizations also commented that women who have perceived their birth or the care they received as traumatic or disrespectful are more likely to develop postpartum mood disorders and potentially difficulty in establishing healthy mother-infant attachment. (Beck, 2004), (Beck, Watson, 2008), (Beck, 2006).

The consensus statement goes on to state the characteristics of normal physiologic birth;

  • is characterized by spontaneous onset and progression of labor;
  • includes biological and psychological conditions that promote effective labor;
  • results in the vaginal birth of of the infant and placenta;
  • results in physiological blood loss,
  • facilitates optimal newborn transition through skin-to-skin contact and keeping the mother and infant together during the postpartum period; and
  • supports early initiation of breastfeeding. (World Health Organization 1996).

When I was reading the above list, as outlined by the World Health Organization and cited in the consensus statement,  I was stuck by how these statements are in sync with Lamaze International’s Healthy Birth Practices.  I was also a bit discouraged that these statements, published by WHO in 1996 sometimes still seem a distant goal.

There are factors that interfere with the normal physiologic process, including many that you may be very familiar with; induction or augmentation of labor, lack of a supportive environment, time limits on labor, denial of food and drink, pain medications, episiotomies, vacuum or forceps assisted deliveries, cesareans, immediate cord clamping, separation of the new mother from her newborn and finally, a situation that may feel threatening or unsupportive to the mother.

The consensus statement recognizes the numerous short-term and long-term health implications of normal birth to the mother-baby dyad.  Allowing labor and birth to unfold without interference permits labor and birth hormones to work effectively, thereby reducing the need for the familiar “cascade of interventions.”

For most women, the short-term benefits of normal physiologic birth include emerging from childbirth feeling physically and emotionally healthy and powerful as mothers…A focus on these aspects of normal physiologic birth will help to change the current discourse on childbirth as an illness state where authority resides external to the woman to one of wellness in which women and clinicians share decisions and accountability. (Kennedy, Nardini, McLeod-Waldo, 2009).

When women enter motherhood from a position of strength and confidence, babies benefit, families benefit and society benefits.  Multiple factors for the woman, the clinician and the birthing environment help to promote women birthing without intervention.  All three sides of an important triad need to share equal responsibility in meeting this goal.

The consensus statement indicates that education plays a role in helping women obtain a normal physiologic birth.  The role of the childbirth educator cannot be underestimated.  Sharing the values of Lamaze and the Lamaze Healthy Birth Practices is right in line with the midwifery statement.

ACNM, MANA and NACPM go on to encourage hospital policies to be set that support normal birth, the recognition that care practices need to be evidenced based.  Midwifery care is a “key strategy” in that direction.  Education of clinicians on care practices that promote physiologic birth and furthering research on the effects of normal birth, among other things.

This consensus statement is clear and powerful in demonstrating that our mothers and babies deserve, depend on and require the opportunity to birth without interventions and that everyone will benefit as a result, in the absence of medical complications or medical need.  I look forward to policy changes, increased accessibility of mothers to midwives and the midwifery model of care and collaboration of all health care providers, both doctors and midwives, to promote practices that result in an increase in normal physiologic birth.

Take a moment to read the entire consensus statement and let me know what you think?  A step in the right direction?  What comes next?  Do you think it is exciting that these three organizations have worked together to come out with this bold challenge to make change? What do you do in your childbirth classes or with the women you work with to promote these values represented by the consensus statement.  Would you add anything else?   I welcome your discussion in our comments section. – SM


Beck CT. Birth trauma: in the eye of the beholder. Nurs Res. 2004; 53(1):28-35.

Beck CT, Watson S. The impact of birth trauma on breastfeeding: a tale of two pathways. Nurs Res. 2008; 57(4):228-236.

Beck CT. The anniversary of birth trauma: failure to rescue. Nurs Res. 2006; 55(6): 381-390.

Beck CT.Post-traumatic stress disorder due to childbirth:the aftermath.NursRes, 2004; 53(4):216-224.

Declercq ER, Sakala C, Corry MP, et al. Listening to mothers II: Report of the Second National U.S. Survey of Women’s Childbearing Experiences. New York: Childbirth Connection; 2006.

Kennedy HP, Nardini K, McLeod-Waldo R, et al. Top-selling childbirth advice books: a discourse analysis. Birth. 2009;36(4):318-324.

Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Ventura SJ, et al. Births: preliminary data for 2010. Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2011; 60(2):1-25.

Sakala C, Corry MP. Evidence-based maternity care: what it is and what it can achieve. New York, NY: Milbank Memorial Fund; 2008.

World Health Organization. Care in Normal Birth: A Practical Guide. World Health Organization; 1996.

Babies, Breastfeeding, Cesarean Birth, Childbirth Education, Epidural Analgesia, Evidence Based Medicine, Healthy Birth Practices, Healthy Care Practices, Home Birth, Infant Attachment, informed Consent, Maternal Mental Health, Maternal Mortality, Maternal Quality Improvement, Medical Interventions, Midwifery, Newborns, Pain Management, Push for Your Baby, Transforming Maternity Care , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Lamaze International Well-Represented at DONA Conference

July 25th, 2012 by avatar

Photo Credit Kyndal May

I just returned from Cancun, Mexico, where I was attending DONA International’s 18th Annual Conference and helping DONA to celebrate their 20th birthday.  I was lucky enough to be selected to present a concurrent session on “The Paperless Doula- Virtual Paperwork Tips and Tricks” and attend many fabulous sessions with international speakers during the four day conference.

During my time at the conference, I was struck by how many familiar Lamaze faces and names I was meeting.  I caught up with Ann Grauer, DONA International Director of Education, (and LCCE) and asked her exactly how many Lamaze Certified Childbirth Educators were registered for the 2012 conference.  I was surprised to learn that 37 LCCEs were in attendance at this year’s DONA conference!  I was so proud to see that Lamaze International was a major sponsor of the 2012 DONA Conference and our presence was everywhere.  Lamaze International members and certified educators were Keynote Speakers, Concurrent Session Speakers, serving on the board of directors of DONA and peppered throughout the audience. LCCEs and trainers, Elena Carrillo and Guadalupe Trueba taught a Lamaze workshop before the conference and were the recipients of the Penny Simkin Award this year.

LCCEs attend the DONA Conference
Photo Credit HeatherGail Lovejoy

In talking to Ann Grauer, former DONA President, she informed me that when she served in the president’s position in 2005, she required the entire DONA board to take a Lamaze workshop, as she felt that the values and principles of the two organizations were so similar.  Being a member and certified by both DONA and Lamaze, I have long been aware of how like minded and compatible both organizations are, but was struck with how closely both these groups support each other, share membership, and have the core principles of supporting normal birth, evidenced based medicine and informed choice for birthing women and their families at their core.

In Cancun, I met up with Lamaze International’s President-Elect, Tara Owens Shuler, MEd, CD(DONA), LCCE, FACCE, for a few minutes, during a break in the conference action, to talk to her about DONA and Lamaze International’s unique relationship.  Tara commented that there is a “natural pipeline between the doula and the childbirth educator” and that DONA and Lamaze have had a strong unity and association for a long time.  Tara shared how she believes that both organizations are leading the way in working for women and  share the common bond of being long time advocates for normal birth.

Tara noted how both DONA and Lamaze are expanding their reach internationally, with both organizations holding workshops and trainings around the globe and making a concerted effort to develop membership beyond North America.  Our groups face the same challenges.

Tara shared how this was her first DONA International conference and she was delighted to participate and glad that Lamaze International could have such a strong presence in sponsorship and in participation by members.  Tara said that she had a new vision on how strong and committed doulas are and was especially moved by the singing of DONA Nobis Pacem at the closing ceremony of the conference.  Tara was struck by how much DONA International had accomplished in the 20 years since it was formed by Penny Simkin, Annie Kennedy, Phyllis and Marshall Klaus and John Kennell.

l-r, Sharon Muza, Science & Sensiblity, DONA Int’l President Jennifer Rokeby-Mayeux, Lamaze Int’l President-Elect Tara Owens Shuler
Photo Credit Kyndal May

Tara stated how she hoped that both organizations can continue to collaborate and share resources, as they work to celebrate birth and support women during the childbearing year.  I was glad that Tara, a DONA certified doula herself, could come and join in the conference and represent Lamaze in such a professional and graceful manner.

I look forward to learning more about how Lamaze International and DONA International can work together to help promote normal birth, offer support for women during their pregnancies, labors, births and postpartum periods, while furthering the practices that are evidenced based and produce positive outcomes for mothers and babies.

If you are an LCCE and attended the DONA International Conference, please let us know your thoughts and experiences while in Cancun.  If you are not an LCCE, did attending the conference encourage you to pursue training with Lamaze?  I would love to hear your experiences.  Please comment here.




Childbirth Education, Continuing Education, Doula Care, Evidence Based Medicine, Lamaze Method, Push for Your Baby, Science & Sensibility, Social Media , , , , , ,

Research Review: Facilitating Autonomous Infant Hand Use During Breastfeeding

July 17th, 2012 by avatar

Creative Commons photo by Raphael Goetter

As the mother of two children, both who breastfed well into toddlerhood, and as a childbirth professional, I have spent a lot of time over the years 1) learning how to breastfeed or breastfeeding my children and 2) facilitating “how to breastfeed” conversations with pregnant women and their partners in my Lamaze classes, working as a birth doula with new mothers immediately after birth and in the first postpartum days at home with their newborn as well as regularly training new birth doulas and childbirth educators on how to prepare and work with their clients and students in the early days of the breastfeeding relationship.

I frequently find that new mothers often consider breastfeeding the next potential challenge after they have birthed, and getting it “right” includes avoiding pain, developing a good milk supply and making sure that their baby is getting all the nutrition they need in the vulnerable first days when things are so new and unfamiliar.  Breastfeeding challenges can increase the rockiness of an already emotionally and physically fragile time for the mother-baby dyad.

I have watched teaching methods, techniques and vocabulary change as more is learned about the newborn, their instinctive behaviors and the innate wisdom of the mothers of these new little ones.  Most of us have seen the widely viewed “Breast Crawl” video put out by UNICEF, WHO and WABA, and ooh-ed and ah-ed at the wisdom of the just born baby who self-latches when placed on its mother’s chest.   Suzanne Colson, Rebecca Glover, Christina Smillie and others have shared resources and information that has helped mothers and the professionals that support them get breastfeeding off to the best start possible, by introducing concepts such as baby led and laid back breastfeeding.

It was with great interest that I read Facilitating Autonomous Infant Hand Use During Breastfeeding and learned the important role the newborn’s hands play in helping to shape the breast, areola and nipple to facilitate breastfeeding.  I have always encouraged mothers to undress their newborn to allow for skin to skin when nursing, and sighed when I saw trained professionals encourage mothers to nurse a swaddled newborn.  But, I have to admit, I was guilty of encouraging mothers to “tuck” their baby’s hands out of the way when getting the baby to latch on, concerned that the baby’s hands would prevent a good latch as the baby seemed to want to suck on both the breast and their hand at the same time.

 In the past, the baby’s hand movements while at the breast where considered “uncoordinated,” “purposeless” and “random,” and were thought to interfere with the coordination of the breastfeeding process.  Current research shows that not to be the case at all.

Catherine Watson Genna, BS, IBCLC, RLC and Diklah Barak, BOT, the authors of Facilitating Autonomous Infant Hand Use During Breastfeeding share that babies that hug the breast with their hands are helping to stabilize their neck and shoulder girdle, by pulling together the shoulder blades. Hand movements, by the infant on the breast, increase maternal oxytocin.  It also causes the nipple tissue to become erect, which facilitates latch.  Babies are best able to use their hands “against gravity”, lifting them up, when their hands are in their field of vision.  The hands are used along with the lips and tongue to draw the nipple into the mouth, a behavior that disappears around 3-4 months of age.

The authors observed that infants use their hands to push and pull the breast to shape the breast and provide easier access to the nipple.  Newborns and young infants also use their hands to push the breast away, possibly to get a better visual sense of the location of the nipple.  Genna and Barak also state that an infant may feel the nipple with their hand, and use the hand as a guide to bring their mouth to the nipple.

 Wonderful black and white pictures accompany this article, and useful video clips are included for great visuals of the behaviors described by the authors.  The authors provide information on how to facilitate infant hand use during the breastfeeding session, including step-by-step instructions that can be shared with expectant and new mothers when you are teaching.

 Teaching new mothers that their newborn’s hands are a tool that the baby uses to find and latch on to the nipple, rather than something to be restrained and held out of the way, can help new mothers to appreciate the innate abilities of their newborn to self-latch and breastfeed successfully.  The materials in this article can be incorporated in the curriculum you cover when you discuss breastfeeding, and increase confidence and success for the new mother and encourage the breastfeeding relationship to have the best start possible.

 Please take a few minutes to follow the link and read the article, view the pictures and videos and let me know how you envision using this information in future classes?  Have you changed how you teach breastfeeding as new concepts and information have become available?  Share your tips and success stories with us, so that we all can become more skilled at providing new parents with effective teaching practices that support the breastfeeding relationship.  I look forward to hearing from you.


Genna, C.W. & Barak, D.  Facilitating autonomous infant hand use during breastfeeding.  Clin Lact 2010; 1(1):15-20.





Babies, Breastfeeding, Continuing Education, Doula Care, Evidence Based Medicine, Healthy Birth Practices, Infant Attachment, New Research, Newborns, Parenting an Infant, Practice Guidelines, Research , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Free “Ethics in Childbirth Education” Webinar offered by Lamaze International

July 16th, 2012 by avatar

Lamaze International is offering childbirth educators and others the opportunity to participate in a free hour-long webinar with Raymond De Vries, Ph. D.  The webinar is scheduled for Wednesday, July 18th , 2012 from 1:00-2:00 PM EDT.

Dr. De Vries is a Professor at the Center for Bioethics and Social Sciences in Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School.  Dr. De Vries has written several published papers and was most recently quoted The Atlantic Monthly article; “The Most Scientific Birth Is Often the Least Technological Birth”.

At the end of this webinar session, learners will be able to define how to apply the Lamaze code of ethics to pre-natal education by adopting a sociological approach to thinking about and resolving ethical dilemmas of birth which takes into account the social, economic, and political context within which ethical problems exist.

 Please click here to register for the free “Ethics in Childbirth” webinar.

Childbirth Education, Continuing Education, Legal Issues, Uncategorized, Webinars , , , , , , ,

cheap oakleys fake oakleys cheap jerseys cheap nfl jerseys wholesale jerseys wholesale nfl jerseys