Friday, 22 November 2013

CHILDBIRTH PRACTICES AND DEVELOPMENTS

In the year 1588, the Chamberlen brothers (their father, the physician Chambellan had settled in England from France) devoted their attention to midwifery and invented the obstetrical forceps. However, they kept the invention a secret and attempted to control the midwives. The closely guarded secret was passed to the next generation, namely Peter Chamberlen who wrote a pamphlet entitled 'A voice in Ramah, or the Cry of Women and Children as Echoed Forth in the Compassion of Peter Chamberlen'.

 The secret was still kept in the family and in turn it was handed to Peter's sons of whom Hugh, 1630 - 1706, was the most important. In the words of Hugh Chamberlen, "My father, brother, and myself have by God's blessing and our own industry attained to and long practiced a way of delivering women in this case without prejudice to them or their infants." .....He still kept the secret.



Hugh Chamberlen Junior finally allowed his family secret to leak out and the instrument known as the forceps came into general use, however, the credit for the discovery of the obstetrical forceps is not always given to Chamberlen, but instead to a Belgian, Jean Palfyne, who developed an instrument which he presented freely to the Paris Academy in 1721.

The forceps originally were crude, particularly in the lock that held the blades together. Laurence Sterne in Tristram Shandy says: "Dr. Slop had lost his teeth - his favourite instrument (the obstetrical forceps) - by some misapplication of it, unfortunately slipping, he formerly, in a hard labour, knocked out three of the best of them with the handle of it..."

The purpose of the forceps is to assist in the extraction of the child when the pushing forces of the mother are lacking, or when it is advisable to terminate labour rapidly, however the forceps did not replace the podalic version. Each of the three procedures - podalic version, forceps and Caesarean section has its particular province. Podalic version makes it possible to correct the position of the child and to extract it by its feet, but the child must still be in the uterus and freely moveable. When labour has advanced and the child, in the normal position, has its head engaged in the inelastic ring formed by the pelvic bones it cannot be disengaged and pushed back into the uterus. If the strength of the mother fails, earlier practitioners could not assist in extracting the baby and could only wait for labour to proceed, which was often too late to save the child. The obstetrical forceps could overcome these difficulties.

The forceps consists of two wide flat blades curved to fit gently over the child's head. The blades are inserted and brought into position separately, then locked together, firmly gripping the head. By turning and gently pulling the child is extracted. Any opening through which the head will pass will readily allow the passage of the rest of the body, for the baby's head is of a larger diameter than is its shoulders or trunk or hips.

Neither the application of forceps nor podalic version will aid birth when the ring made by the bones of the pelvis is too small to admit the head of the child. The only procedure which could be applied in these circumstances was Caesarean section which was then far too dangerous.

Although it was clearly recognised, in the sixteenth century, that the child must pass through the ring formed by the pelvic bones, they did not know the exact structure or relation of these bones. Parè, in fact, believed, as did most other physicians, that the pelvis separated in the front and spread, as might a broken hoop, to make room for the child's head to pass. It was Andreas Vesalius who, in his book of anatomy, in 1543, first showed, although crudely, the true relation of the bones of the pelvis.

Anatomical study, as begun by Vesalius, gradually showed the fallacy of the separation of the pelvic bones during childbirth. An extract from a book on midwifery published in 1682 indicates both the passing of this fallacy and also the means for the study of anatomy used by men as eminent as Paré. This book is entitled, The English Midwife, Enlarged, Containing Directions to Midwives;…the Whole Fitted for the Meanest Capacities. It was published in London, where it was "Printed for Rowland Reynolds, next door to the Golden Bottle in the Strand, at the middle Exchange door."
The book was a plagiarism of Wolveridge's Speculum Matricis Hibernicum, a standard text of its time, but now the rarest book of its kind. The quotation in question, written a century after the time of Versalius and Parè, is as follows:

"...Ambroise Paré, a most famous Chirurgion in his time at Paris (quoting many witnesses to the thing), gives us an History of a Woman in whom (having been hang'd 14 days after she was delivered in Child-birth,) he found (as he saith) the share bone separated in the middle the breadth of half a finger, and the flanck-bones themselves disjointed from the hoop-bone. But we will not in this matter accuse him of an imposture as having too much respect, and a better opinion of so worthy a person, and believing him to be too sincere as to commit such a crime; but do indeed believe the good man might be mistaken in this separation; for we cannot probably conceive that being so at the time of her labour it would remain so a fortnight after, the breadth of half a finger; for then they would have been forc'd to carry this Woman to execution; (for they are executed at Paris within the City or Suburbs,) because she would not have been able to have supported her self, or climbe the ladder of the Gibbet; and keep her self on her Legs according to the custome of other Malefactors; because the body is only supported by the stability of these bones; wherefore we must believe, as most probable, that such a disjunction and separation were caused either from the falling of this Woman's body from the high Gibbet to the ground after execution or from some blow on that place from some hard thing."





                        
                                 TITLE PAGE OF  THE ENGLISH MIDWIFE, ENLARGED

Published in 1682. The text of this book is presented as a dialogue between the doctor and the midwife, and much sound practical advice is given. The book not only covers obstetrics, but also the diseases of children and the diseases peculiar to women; The type of women undertaking midwifery and the care of women and children is indicated by the statement on the title page, "The whole fitted for the meanest capacities."








NURSES SWADDLING A CHILD


In the seventeenth century, the period of this woodcut, the baby, at birth, was first bathed and then salted all over (in accord with the teachings of Galen), and its head tightly bandaged to shape it. Next it was bound round and round in swaddling bandages until it was unable to make the slightest movement. These bandages were usually taken off only once a day, when the child was allowed a few minutes of exercise. The swaddling continued for several months. About half of the children so treated died during the first year of life


.

Prior to the time of anaesthesia and asepsis, the woman with a deformed pelvis could have serious difficulties at the time of her delivery. Caesarean section with its then high mortality for the mother might be attempted, or the pelvic bones might be cut apart at their joint at the front of the body, or the resort of earlier times might be used and the child destroyed, but in serious deformity even this last procedure was far from successful. The induction of abortion, or later of premature labour, offered a solution to this difficulty.

Abortion had long been practiced and within the Greek and Roman cultures the procedure of inducing abortion was continued, being used by midwives extensively for any and all reasons. However, some of the more discerning physicians adopted a more restrained view; clearly outlined in the quotation given from Soranus: "...The fruit of conception is not to be destroyed at will because of adultery or of care for beauty, but is to be destroyed to avert danger appending to birth..."
With the supremacy of the Catholic Church in Europe the practice of abortion was forbidden under penalty of eternal damnation.

In England, in the eighteenth century, means of measuring the size of the pelvis were sufficiently established, so in cases of abnormality the pregnancy was brought to an end late in the seventh month or early eighth month, before the child had reached its full development. The smaller size of the child enabled its passage through a narrower than normal pelvis, and with good care the child could be nurtured.


French physicians did not follow the example of the English physicians, probably strongly influenced by the Catholic Church in France. However, despite the attitude taken by the medical profession of France, and also the civil and ecclesiastical decrees and proclamations, abortion was extensively practiced and had been for many years, but not for medical reasons. The great ladies of the day made light of the earthly and spiritual terrors held up to them and resorted to the crime to hide the consequences of their sexual irregularities. Bayles, actually, uses this fact to support the theory that fear of worldly shame is a stronger sentiment than that of religion.



The conditions existing in Paris at this time, seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries, can be gathered from a letter of Guy Patin, at one time dean of the Faculté de Médecine. Patin was a man of satirical humour and of keen observation, as may be judged from the fact that as early as 1657 he made the statement: "As to our publishers - I can hope for nothing from them. They print nothing at their own expense but novela utrisque " ( sex novels ).

At the time Patin wrote there was a large class of men and women who made a business of producing abortion; the women in this trade were chiefly the midwives. Patin's letter, written in 1660, comments on the case of Mademoiselle de Guerchi, who had been seduced by the Duc de Vitry and who had died from infection resulting from an induced abortion.


From Patin's letter:
" They make a great clamour here about the death of Mademoiselle de Guerchi. They had imprisoned the midwife at the Chatelet, but she had been taken from there to the conciergerie by order of the court. The curé of Saint Eustache has refused sepulture to the body of the lady. They say that it was carried to the hotel de Condé, and was there put in quicklime in order to consume it soon, so that it could not be identified if anyone came to see it. The midwife had defended herself well up to now...But I believe the question (torture) will be put to her. The vicars-general and the plenipotentiaries went to complain to the Premier President that in a year six hundred women, by actual count, have confessed to killing and destroying their fruit."

The midwife was later found guilty and hanged at Croix du Trahoir, as Patin says, " in good company."





INVITATION TO GUY PATIN'S FUNERAL


At the time the English physicians revived the practice of inducing premature birth as a means of avoiding difficult labour; midwifery had not been separated from surgery. In earlier times the physician's role was restricted to destructive surgical procedures, however, the arrival of podalic version and the use of forceps reduced the number of cases in which it was necessary to destroy the child. As obstetrics remained in the hands of the surgeons, they tended to make child-bearing a surgical operation and to use instruments whenever possible - a practice labelled 'meddlesome midwifery'.


It 
It was said at that time of one prominent German obstetrician that he employed instruments twenty-nine times in sixty-one births, and of another that he 'began to cut and slash' as soon as everything was not precisely normal, and in this way had a mortality of twenty per cent.
Blood-letting was also carried into the field of obstetrics, and the woman in labour was bled to prevent disease if everything seemed normal, and for treatment if anything seemed abnormal.


There was strong reaction to even beneficial surgical and instrumental procedures at child-birth, and for a time these practices were discarded. In the middle of the eighteenth century William Hunter, to emphasise his views of interfering with childbirth, was in the habit of showing his obstetrical forceps covered with rust, as evidence of the fact that he never used it. William Hunter was trained at the University of Glasgow - renowned for educating prominent medical practitioners - and was the leading consultant in midwifery in London. His views were extremely influential on the physicians in England.

The practice of avoiding the use of instruments and trusting the powers of nature went so far that in 1819 Sir Richard Croft, obstetrician to Princess Charlotte, upon whose life depended the hope of the dynasty, permitted the princess to remain in labour for fifty- two hours. The child was born dead and the mother died six hours later. Croft shot himself in remorse for his error of judgment.

In time, the reaction against operative interference caused obstetrics to be an art in its own right and not simply a branch of surgery. In the nineteenth century obstetrics became a recognised part of medical practice; the rational use of forceps and other operative procedures returned merely as necessary aids in difficult cases.











                                                         An etching by Daumier showing

                                                              the midwife and her sign
  




                                           




Three Kids Gripped By Evil By Polly Mullaney     
Amazon Kindle, Amazon paperback




                                   








No comments:

Post a Comment