Consumer demand for cesarean section deliveries in Brazil: informed decision-making, patient choice or social inequality?

Article English OPEN
Behague, DP ; Victora, CG ; Barros, FC (2002)

OBJECTIVES: To investigate why some women prefer caesarean sections and how decisions to medicalise birthing are influenced by patients, doctors, and the sociomedical environment. DESIGN: Population based birth cohort study, using ethnographic and epidemiological methods. SETTING: Epidemiological study: women living in the urban area of Pelotas, Brazil who gave birth in hospital during the study. Ethnographic study: subsample of 80 women selected at random from the birth cohort. Nineteen medical staff were interviewed. PARTICIPANTS: 5304 women who gave birth in any of the city's hospitals in 1993. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Birth by caesarean section or vaginal delivery. RESULTS: In both samples women from families with higher incomes and higher levels of education had caesarean sections more often than other women. Many lower to middle class women sought caesarean sections to avoid what they considered poor quality care and medical neglect, resulting from social prejudice. These women used medicalised prenatal and birthing health care to increase their chance of acquiring a caesarean section, particularly if they had social power in the home. Both social power and women's behaviour towards seeking medicalised health care remained significantly associated with type of birth after controlling for family income and maternal education. CONCLUSIONS: Fear of substandard care is behind many poor women's preferences for a caesarean section. Variables pertaining to women's role in the process of redefining and negotiating medical risks were much stronger correlates of caesarean section rates than income or education. The unequal distribution of medical technology has altered concepts of good and normal birthing. Arguments supporting interventionist birthing for all on the basis of equal access to health care must be reviewed.
  • References (27)
    27 references, page 1 of 3

    1 Belizan J, Althabe F, Barros F, Alezander S. Rates and implications of caesarean sections in Latin America: ecological study. BMJ 1999;319:1397­ 402.

    2 Barros F, Victora C, Morris S. Caesarean sections in Brazil. Lancet 1996;347:839.

    3 World Health Organization. Appropriate technology for birth. Lancet 1985;2:436­7.

    4 Ash A, Okah D. What is the right number of caesarean sections? Lancet 1997;349:1557.

    5 Al­Mufti R, McCarthy A, Fisk N. Obstetricians' personal choice and mode of delivery. Lancet 1996;347:544.

    6 Geary M, Wilshin J, Persaud M, Hindmarch P, Rodeck C. Do doctors have an increased rate of caesarean section? Lancet 1998;351:1117.

    7 Murray S, Pradenas F. Health sector reform and rise of caesarean birth in Chile. Lancet 1997;349:64.

    8 Haines A. Health care in Brazil. BMJ 1993;306:503­6.

    9 De Mello e Souza C. C­sections as ideal births: The cultural construction of beneficience and patients' rights in Brazil. Cambridge Q Healthcare Ethics 1994;3:358­66.

    10 Lilford R, Van Coerverden deGroot H, Moore P, Gingham P. The relative risks of caesarean section (intrapartum and elective) and vaginal delivery: a detailed analysis to exclude the effects of medical disorders and other acute preexisting physiological disturbances. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1990;97:883­92.

  • Metrics
    views in OpenAIRE
    views in local repository
    downloads in local repository

    The information is available from the following content providers:

    From Number Of Views Number Of Downloads
    LSHTM Research Online - IRUS-UK 0 359
Share - Bookmark