Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T04:17:36.989Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Framing Black Infant and Maternal Mortality

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 March 2022

Abstract

This article looks to the past to consider how government officials, health professionals, and legal authorities have historically framed racial disparities in birth and the lasting impact these explanations have had on Black birthing experiences and outcomes.

Type
Symposium Articles
Copyright
© 2022 The Author(s)

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Achievements in Public Health, 1900-1999: Healthier Mothers and Babies,” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 48, no. 38 (Oct 1, 1999): 849858; K.M. Bridges, “Racial Disparities in Maternal Mortality,” New York University Law Review 95, no. 5 (2020): 1229-1318; 1285-1286.Google Scholar
U.S. 1880 Census, Report on the Mortality and Vital Statistics of the United States, Volumes 11-12 (1885): at xxiii, xxvii, xxxiv.Google Scholar
Vedam, S., Stoll, K., MacDorman, M.F., Declercq, E., Cramer, R., Cheyney, M., et al., “Mapping Integration of Midwives across the United States: Impact on Access, Equity, and Outcomes,” PLoS ONE 13, no. 2 (2018): e0192523; M. Sperlich, C. Gabriel, and N.M. St. Vil, “Preference, Knowledge and Utilization of Midwives, Childbirth Education Classes and Doulas among U.S. Black and White Women: Implications for Pregnancy and Childbirth Outcomes,” Social Work in Health Care 58, no. 10 (2019): 988-1001.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fraser, G.J., African American Midwifery in the South Dialogues of Birth, Race, and Memory (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1970 (1975): 2223; “Midwives Deliver over Half of Race Babies Born in U.S.,” Atlanta Daily World, August 20, 1937, at 5.Google Scholar
Tandy, E., The Health Situation of Negro Mothers and Babies in the United States: A Brief Statement of Health Status, Health Services, and Needs (1941): at 2.Google Scholar
Report on the Midwife Survey in Texas, January 2, 1925,” in Litoff, J.B., ed., The American Midwife Debate: A Sourcebook on Its Modern Origins (New York: Greenwood Press, 1986): at 6781.Google Scholar
Johnson, H.T., “The La Fayette Dispensary,” in Report of Proceedings of the Nineteenth Annual Meeting of the Alumnae Association of the Woman’s Medical College of Pennsylvania, May 9 and 10 1894 (Philadelphia, 1894): at 106107.Google Scholar
Dowling, J.D., “Points of Interest in a Survey of Maternal Mortality,” American Journal of Public Health 27 (August 1937): 803808, at 805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, J.W., “A Critical Analysis of Twenty-One Years’ Experience with Cæsarean Section,” Bulletin of the Johns Hopkins Hospital 32, no. 364 (June 1921): 173184.Google Scholar
Terry, C.C., “Midwives: Their Influence on Early Infant Mortality,” American Journal of Public Health 5, no. 8 (1915): 695699.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beardsley, E.H., A History of Neglect: Health Care for Blacks and Mill Workers in the Twentieth-Century South (Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1987): at 1416.Google Scholar
Marriner, J., “Midwifery in Alabama,” Public Health Nurse 18, no. 3 (March 1926): 130.Google Scholar
Noyes, C.D., “The Midwifery Problem,” American Journal of Nursing 12, no. 6 (March 1912): 466471, at 467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steele, G., “The Midwife Problem and Its Legal Control,” Maryland Medical Journal 48, no. 1 (January 1905): 1-6.Google Scholar
Darlington, T., “The Present Status of the Midwife,” American Journal of Obstetrics and the Diseases of Women and Children 63 (1911): 870876; R.G. DeVries, Making Midwives Legal: Childbirth, Medicine, and the Law (Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 1996): at 37.Google Scholar
Constitution and Revised Laws of Louisiana , Act 49, July 13, 1894. Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi had similar legal exemptions for women considered not to be “professional” midwives. See Darlington, supra note 16.Google Scholar
Tovino, S.A., “American Midwifery Litigation and State Legislative Preferences for Physician-Controlled Childbirth,” Cardozo Women’s Law Journal 11, no. 1 (2004): 61106.Google Scholar
Smith, S.L., Sick and Tired of Being Sick and Tired: Black Women’s Health Activism in America, 1890–1950 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1995): at 118148.Google Scholar
Foote, J., “Legislative Measures against Maternal and Infant Mortality: The Midwife Practice Laws of the States and Territories of the United States,” American Journal of Obstetrics and Diseases of Women and Children 80, no. 5 (1919): 534551.Google Scholar
“I Ain’t No Midwife,” S.B. Hornsby interview with M. Willingham, March 24, 1939, Federal Writers’ Project papers #3709, Southern Historical Collection, The Wilson Library, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.Google Scholar
Smith, M.C., Listen to Me Good: The Life Story of an Alabama Midwife (Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 1996): at 102.Google Scholar
Here I draw on R. Charon’s notion of an “ethics of life” to situate midwives’ experiences carrying out their work, in which Charon defines “the ethics of ordinary life” as a concern over “how to fulfill life goals, to honor obligations, and to make sense of events in ways that make it possible to go on.” See R. Charon and M. Montello, Stories Matter: The Role of Narrative in Medical Ethics (New York: Routledge, 2002): at xii.Google Scholar
See Smith, supra note 22, at 100101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reagan, L.J., “Linking Midwives and Abortion in the Progressive Era,” Bulletin of the History of Medicine 69, no. 4 (1995): 569598.Google ScholarPubMed
See Smith, supra note 23, at 100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edgar, J. Clifton, “The Remedy for the Midwife Problem,” American Journal of Obstetrics and Diseases of Women and Children 63 (1911): 881-884, at 881.Google Scholar
M. Campbell, Folks Do Get Born (New York: Rinehart & Company Inc., 1946): at 8; W. Muigai, “‘Something Wasn’t Clean’: Black Midwifery, Birth, and Postwar Medical Education in All My Babies,” Bulletin of the History of Medicine 93, no. 1 (2019): 82-113.Google Scholar
Ladd-Taylor, M., “‘Grannies’ and ‘Spinsters’: Midwife Education under the Sheppard-Towner Act,” Journal of Social History 22, no. 2 (1988): 255275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tandy, E., The Health Situation of Negro Mothers and Babies in the United States: A Brief Statement of Health Status, Health Services, and Needs (July 1940).Google Scholar
L. Trabert to E. Watters, April 13, 1923, folder 4-10-4-2, box 190, Children’s Bureau Records, Central Files 1925-1928, Record Group 102, National Archives, College Park, Maryland.Google Scholar
Reynolds, P. Preston, “Professional and Hospital Discrimination and the US Court of Appeals Fourth Circuit 1956-1967,” American Journal of Public Health 94, no. 5 (2004): 710720; J. Quadagno, “Promoting Civil Rights through the Welfare State: How Medicare Integrated Southern Hospitals,” Social Problems 47, no. 1 (2000): 68-89.Google Scholar
Smith, D.B., “Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities and the Unfinished Civil Rights Agenda,” Health Affairs 24, no. 2 (2005): 317324.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Infant and Perinatal Mortality in the United States (1965): Table O at 43. The shift to hospital births was further cemented with the passing of Medicaid, which only covered deliveries attended by physicians or nurse-midwives. Expectant mothers who relied on Medicaid benefits could not be attended by lay midwives.Google Scholar
United States Commission on Civil Rights, Civil Rights ‘63: 1963 Report of the United States Commission on Civil Rights (1964): at 141.Google Scholar
U.S. Civil Rights Commission, Title VI One Year After…A Survey of Desegregation of Health and Welfare Services in the South (1966): at 5.Google Scholar
See Civil Rights ’63, supra note 36, at 137-138.Google Scholar
“Study Reveals Negro Birth Rate for Decade in Chicago Higher Than White,” Crusader (Chicago), May 7, 1954, at 10; “Discrimination Charge Levied in Illinois,” Columbia Record July 23, 1956.Google Scholar
“Infant Death Rate Is High Here,” Chicago Tribune June 21, 1971.Google Scholar
Reynolds, P. Preston, “The Federal Government’s Use of Title VI and Medicare to Racially Integrate Hospitals in the United States, 1963 through 1967,” American Journal of Public Health 87, no. 11 (1997): 18501858; P. Preston Reynolds, “Hospitals and Civil Rights, 1945-1963: The Case of Simkins v Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital,” Annals of Internal Medicine 126, no. 11 (1997): 898-906.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thomas, K.K., Deluxe Jim Crow: Civil Rights and American Health Policy, 1935–1954 (Athens: University of Georgia Press, 2011).Google Scholar
Frankel, B.Childbirth in the Ghetto: Folk Beliefs of Negro Women in a North Philadelphia Hospital Ward (San Francisco: R & E Research Associates, 1977): at 68.Google Scholar
Davis, K. and Schoen, K., Health and the War on Poverty: A Ten-Year Appraisal (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 1978): at 34.Google Scholar
U.S. Civil Rights Commission, Title VI One Year After…A Survey of Desegregation of Health and Welfare Services in the South (1966): at 12.Google Scholar
James, R.D., “Patient Pinch: Charity Case Decline Poses Major Problems in Educating Doctors,” Wall Street Journal, December 27, 1963, at 1. On the longer history of Black women serving as medical subjects, see D. Cooper Owens, Medical Bondage: Race, Gender and the Origins of American Gynecology (Athens: University of Georgia Press, 2017).Google Scholar
See Cooper Owens supra note 45.Google Scholar
Krieger, N., Chen, J.T., Coull, B., Waterman, P.D., and Beckfield, J., “The Unique Impact of Abolition of Jim Crow Laws on Reducing Inequities in Infant Death Rates and Implications for Choice of Comparison Groups in Analyzing Societal Feterminants of Health,” American Journal of Public Health 103, no. 12 (2013): 22342244.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sullivan, R., “2 Hospitals Are Accused of Segregating by Race,” New York Times, May 20, 1994, at B3.Google Scholar
Jones, C., “Mt. Sinai Changing Allocation of Rooms as Bias Inquiry Starts,” New York Times, October 19, 1993, at B6.Google Scholar
Huesch, M. and Doctor, J.N., “Factors Associated with Increased Cesarean Risk among African American Women: Evidence from California, 2010,” American Journal of Public Health 105, no. 5 (2015): 956962.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
S. Washington, Caughey, A.B., Cheng, Y.W., and Bryant, A.S., “Racial and Ethnic Differences in Indication for Primary Cesarean Delivery at Term: Experience at One U.S. Institution,” Birth 39, no. 2 (2012): 128134.Google Scholar
Roberts, D., Killing the Black Body: Race, Reproduction, and the Meaning of Liberty (New York: Vintage, 1999); J. Schoen, Choice and Coercion: Birth Control, Sterilization, and Abortion in Public Health and Welfare (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2005); L.M. Paltrow and J. Flavin, “Arrests of and Forced Interventions on Pregnant Women in the United States, 1973–2005: Implications for Women’s Legal Status and Public Health,” Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law 38, no. 2 (2013): 299-343; K.M. Bridges, Reproducing Race: An Ethnography of Pregnancy As A Site of Racialization (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2011).Google Scholar