Original NY Times Blog Post
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Tara Parker-Pope, on the NY Times
August 28, 2008, 1:16 pm
Do Doctors View Women as ‘Pre-Pregnant?’
A recent report raised concerns about women of childbearing age sharing prescription drugs. While the focus of the study was on drug sharing, readers of the Well blog took the discussion in an entirely different direction.
“I agree that this is a serious issue, but I take great offense at the notion that this is particularly worrisome because these women are of childbearing age,'’ wrote reader Sharon. “Not all women are “pre-pregnant.” We are more than our uteruses!”
Reader Jennifer agreed.
“Framing this as a women’s issue because we have the ability to become pregnant is just insulting. I am tired of being thought of only as a breeding machine who should be regarded as “pre-pregnant” at all times.'’
I was shocked by the reaction, although many other readers chimed in, agreeing that too often women in the health system are treated as “pre-pregnant.'’
To talk more about the issue, I called Cindy Pearson, a long-time women’s health activist and executive director of the National Women’s Health Network.
“You accidentally stumbled into an area that women have had very intense feelings about for at least 40 years,'’ Ms. Pearson said. “American history is very heavily affected by the first time we as an entire country realized that drugs could cause harm to the fetus, and that was thalidomide in the early 1960s. It changed the course of medical care.'’
While more awareness about the risks of drugs to a developing fetus is a good thing, it hasn’t always led to better health care for women, Ms. Pearson said.
“Ever since, women … feel that if they’re ovulating, they’re treated with bikini medicine,'’ Ms. Pearson said. “The attention all goes to their reproductive organs, and that is not right either.'’
To hear the rest of our conversation about the pre-pregnancy debate, listen to the Best of Well podcast, and then please post your thoughts below.
What do you think? Are doctors so obsessed with a woman’s reproductive health that they forget to treat the whole patient?
|
This blog article brings up an interesting point, but what is even more interesting to me are the comments responding to it on the NY Times website. It seems that there are a lot of women out there (or at least a bunch who have found and replied to this blog post) who really do feel offended that their gynecological/obstetric status and health are of primary concern to doctors in all situations. Many of them feel reduced to being looked at as breeding machines.
While I recognize that the feelings expressed are true, I can't help but feel exasperated by these attitudes. The ramifications of pregnancy during medical diagnosis and treatment are so huge that it has to come up and be documented at all times. Being upset by this is like being upset by the speeches airline attendants make prior to take-off on ANY flight. It's not likely that your plane will crash, but if it does, it's likely to be a big deal. Same with pregnancy, only now we add in the chance that the patient is unaware or lying.
Given the legal climate in which doctors work, I can understand why a woman's potential for pregnancy would be of primary concern in treatment of any kind. Honestly, I wouldn't take anyone's word for it either.
So what's the deal? Am I an insensitive male who just can't get it? Is this really an issue of women's rights?