首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>other >Right tool wrong job: Manual vacuum aspiration post-abortion care and transnational population politics in Senegal
【2h】

Right tool wrong job: Manual vacuum aspiration post-abortion care and transnational population politics in Senegal

机译:正确的工具错误的工作:塞内加尔的手动负压吸引人工流产后护理和跨国人口政治

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

The “rightness” of a technology for completing a particular task is negotiated by medical professionals, patients, state institutions, manufacturing companies, and non-governmental organizations. This paper shows how certain technologies may challenge the meaning of the “job” they are designed to accomplish. Manual vacuum aspiration (MVA) is a syringe device for uterine evacuation that can be used to treat complications of incomplete abortion, known as post-abortion care (PAC), or to terminate pregnancy. I explore how negotiations over the rightness of MVA as well as PAC unfold at the intersection of national and global reproductive politics during the daily treatment of abortion complications at three hospitals in Senegal, where PAC is permitted but induced abortion is legally prohibited. Although state health authorities have championed MVA as the “preferred” PAC technology, the primary donor for PAC, the United States Agency for International Development, does not support the purchase of abortifacient technologies. I conducted an ethnography of Senegal's PAC program between 2010 and 2011. Data collection methods included interviews with 49 health professionals, observation of PAC treatment and review of abortion records at three hospitals, and a review of transnational literature on MVA and PAC. While MVA was the most frequently employed form of uterine evacuation in hospitals, concerns about off-label MVA practices contributed to the persistence of less effective methods such as dilation and curettage (D&C) and digital curettage. Anxieties about MVA's capacity to induce abortion have constrained its integration into routine obstetric care. This capacity also raises questions about what the “job,” PAC, represents in Senegalese hospitals. The prioritization of MVA's security over women's access to the preferred technology reinforces gendered inequalities in health care.
机译:用于完成特定任务的技术的“正确性”是由医疗专业人员,患者,国家机构,制造公司和非政府组织协商确定的。本文展示了某些技术如何挑战它们旨在完成的“工作”的含义。手动真空抽吸(MVA)是一种用于子宫排空的注射器设备,可用于治疗不完全流产的并发症(称为人工流产后护理(PAC))或终止妊娠。我探讨了塞内加尔三家医院在日常治疗流产并发症的过程中,如何在国家和全球生殖政治的交汇点上展开有关MVA和PAC的正当性的谈判,这三家医院允许PAC,但法律禁止人工流产。尽管州卫生当局一直倡导MVA作为PAC的“首选”技术,但PAC的主要捐助者美国国际开发署并不支持购买堕胎技术。我在2010年至2011年之间对塞内加尔的PAC计划进行了人种志研究。数据收集方法包括采访49位卫生专业人员,观察PAC治疗和在三家医院检查流产记录,以及回顾有关MVA和PAC的跨国文献。虽然MVA是医院中最常使用的子宫排空形式,但人们对标签外MVA做法的担忧导致了诸如刮宫刮宫术(D&C)和数字刮宫术等无效方法的持续存在。对MVA引起流产的能力的忧虑限制了它在常规产科护理中的应用。这种能力也引起了人们对塞内加尔医院“工作” PAC所代表的问题的质疑。 MVA的安全优先于妇女获得首选技术的机会,加剧了医疗保健中的性别不平等现象。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号