About this site

Welcome to my site. My friends and I created this to share some of my work and – more importantly – to invite an exchange of ideas.

I’ve been a sociologist for a long time, and ventured into a number of different fields over the years: birth and midwifery (which I still think of as my home base); the new genetics and reproductive technologies; medical sociology; bioethics; issues in disability; adoption; race; and now I’m exploring food studies too. Some of you might know my work in one of these areas, others in a different area. What would be really interesting would be to have people talk, with each other and with me, across areas. I’ve tried, with some success over the years, to talk to midwives about genetics; to encourage people who do new reproductive technologies to think about home birth; to have bioethicists pay more attention to what medical sociology can offer; to get people in Food Studies thinking about midwives and where midwifery issues overlap with their concerns. Those are invariably the most fun and stimulating conversations I’ve ever been a part of. Connecting people, connecting ideas, weaving the webs that pull us together – nothing could make me happier. So this site, a gift from friends, is my place to do this kind of weaving.

We’ve grouped my work by area – but please, if you’re here because you have gotten anything useful out of my work in one area, do poke around for a minute in another. Bring your insights and wisdom and experience to a new place, a new issue. Let’s see what we can weave together.

- Barbara Katz Rothman

May 11, 2014

And Yet More on Risk

The Virtual International Day of the Midwife is this wonderful concept in which midwives and interested hangers-on all over the world can join together electronically. For 24 hours speaker after speaker presents work, takes comments and questions and thoughts on a live chat, and a world of midwifery is united. I was invited to present my work on "Risk" and the presentation was recorded. I encourage you to look through the program, see which presentations are of interest.

To go to the general home page, click here.
To see my presentation, click here.

Mar 5, 2014

More on Risk

The Midwives Alliance of North America just published its studies on 'statistical outcomes' of  Home Birth Outcomes of Care for 16,924 Planned Home Births in the United States: The Midwives Alliance of North America Statistics Project, 2004 to 2009“. in the Journal of Midwifery and Women's Health, and Lamaze International's blog 'Science and Sensibility' asked me to write something about home birth and risk.  The comments, no surprise, quickly veered off into stuff about selfish mothers risking their babies lives to have scented-candle-births, and people shouting statistics of risk at each other. 
Oh well.... 
 
If you missed the link to my piece in the above, click here.

Dec 29, 2013

Risky Business?

We live, it’s been said, in a ‘risk society,’ a phrase most associated in academia with the work of Ulrich Beck and Anthony Giddens, but now pretty widely used by people who never heard of them. Of course life’s always been risky – and one could argue that in some ways people, at least the ones who are having public discussions of ‘risk,’ are as safe as people ever have been. I’ll leave it to others to explain why the swings are disappearing from the playgrounds, why kids can’t walk home three blocks by themselves, why it’s important, as I am constantly told by friends and family, that I know my risks and be tested for breast and a dozen other kinds of cancer, heart disease and diabetes. Are those the things that make us less ‘at risk’? Is that really why we are safer? Or is there something else at work here?

And why can I not seem to discuss this issue without constantly asking rhetorical questions?

HEALTH, RISK AND SOCIETY is a journal asking just these questions, or as it says on its home page: “Health Risk & Society is an international scholarly journal devoted to a theoretical and empirical understanding of the social processes which influence the ways in which health risks are taken, communicated, assessed and managed.” Andy Alaszewski, the editor of the journal, invited me to do an introduction to a special issue on the subject of pregnancy and birth. And Andy pointed out that my article was peppered with question marks, and that rhetorical questions are really not appropriate journal style. And yet, as we discussed the problem, he decided that my rhetorical questions were intrinsic to what I was saying and doing, so he let them stand.

What do you think? Is this an unnecessary rhetorical gimmick or flourish? Or do we need to keep asking ourselves these questions?

Click here to read my intro

Oct 23, 2013

Midwifery, Nutrition, and Public Health

 I've been teaching in Maternal and Child Health, under the discipline of Public Health for a while now, and continually bothered by the direction much of public health has taken.  It seems to me much of the field is about public education on matters of health and medicine, and an enormous push to get more people to more medical services more regularly.  That's not what I thought public health was supposed to be about.  When Ruth Deery and Lorna Davies sent me their volume on nutrition in pregnancy and childbirth and asked me to do a foreword, it gave me a moment of clarity on how we ought to be doing public health and how clinicians ought to be doing public education.  And it reminded me how much I love midwifery.

Read my foreword to Ruth Deery and Lorna Davies, editors, Nutrition in Pregnancy and Childbirth, Taylor and Francis, forthcoming, here.

Oct 22, 2013

Thinking about Prenatal Diagnosis -- In German!!!



The lovely thing about having a book translated is very different people, with very different contexts, think about your work.  No more interesting context than Germany exists for my work on Prenatal Testing and its implicit eugenic thinking.  While Americans usually dismiss the idea that there is anything genetic about these tests (they're just to make sure we have healthy babies!) the Germans recognize that search for healthy babies to be precisely what eugenics is ("eu" meaning well, and 'genics" meaning born).  But the hard part about being translated is you really don't understand what's being said about your work!  Recently, Schone Neue Welt der Fortpflanzung was discussed on a radio program in Germany.   So thanks to the kindness of friends, for those who, like me, don't understand German, below is a rough on-the-fly translation of the radio piece, with some commentary.

Listen to the original broadcast here.



Translation on the fly, by Katharina Rost
I listened to it, here the summary:
They have a science book review twice a year always with a special topic. (I am just typing along the program...)
This time it has been value of life.  Two reporters, one presenting two books by women who wrote about their own experiences, another your book. They have a kind of dialogue between these two perspectives. Your perspective, the perspective of the pregnant women.
They present first one book by a mother prenatally diagnosed in pregnancy (like my topic).
Your book is like a reference point, providing a look on society’s for all the other books.  This what they say (I try to type along the program):
"The author is not providing a scientific overview over prenatal diagnosis methods but provides a overview over the development of the last 25 years.  The author has foreseen or really early described what is happening in two parts: one about birth and midwifery, the midwifery model as something which can be put up against the medical system (then they refer that in the others books the women don’t have a midwife, talk about the lack of midwife in the experience of the women).  It’s about pushing the woman out of her own pregnancy.  And pushing out the midwifes and how this all is connected.  The bonding via the ultrasound versus the body-bonding.  The fetus developing to a person out of the symbiosis with the mother.
They talk about the tentative pregnancy (reporter is very surprised, has never heard about it and loves your thoughts :) )
Fetus and mother are put against each other while the woman needs to be seen as a unity (then they refer to the other books, how the women feel the symbiosis, how the medical world is cutting this symbiosis and that for the mothers this symbiosis is not finished; that the mothers don’t seek medical advice but other support).

For BKR is pregnancy as a special time in life, for midwife care model, women need to be seen as active.

Then second part: prenatal diagnosis:
What is to be done with knowledge genetic-- how to feed a child when you know that your child will get sick by 25.  They talk about your writing about PND and the first reporter is always interrupting: Yes, this is how it is! The story of the women is telling exactly this!

Reporter loves your language: her language is emotional and plastic and real and very understandable.

Then another book is presented, very interesting. Another woman who is after the diagnosis researching everything.  After that a historical review about the history of disability politics last century is presented. The last book is about a woman who is killed in the Third Reich by euthanasia.

Conclusion of the reporter is: How are we dealing with disability? What is society doing? 
Today everything is individualized, but who is really deciding? Why are medical experts deciding about moral questions society should decide?
BKR is seeing it as a lost battle because it is proceeding and nobody is putting a limit to it (so you had kind of the last word...)

Very positive reception!!!!!

Feb 3, 2013

Midwifery Skills: On Expertise and Craft


Ever since my first Food Studies conference, I've been struck by the similarities between artisanal food makers and midwives.  And jealous of how successful the food people have been, compared to the birth folk, in making their world-view understandable to the general public.  Here's the start of my attempt to do that, published in the British MIDIRS, midwifery information and resource services.

To read MIDIRS's Facebook post about this article, click here.
To read the article itself, click here.

Jul 22, 2012

Yet another technological fix to a social problem.

I wrote about a very similar topic back in February, but it comes up again and again. And it probably will come up many more times, even after they stop asking me for a soundbyte. 

According to the article that the people at NPR sent me, it appears that IVF may be somewhat more effective in creating pregnancies than we thought it was.  Or maybe not.  I read the article through and through, and there were a number of different ways to interpret the data.  What do we use for the baseline?  How successful is what we used to call ‘trying’ in achieving a pregnancy?  How successful is ‘unprotected intercourse’ as they sometimes call it?  (How successful is not trying?  Ask young woman if they’ve ever had an ‘accidental’ pregnancy --   it’s not all that rare now is it?)  Anyway, reading the new studies, it seems like if we are willing to buy eggs from younger women, putting them at who-knows-what risk, opening up baby-making to yet more market-place values, raise yet more identity and relationship issues for the children we so conceive, it may indeed be more possible than previously thought for women in their 40’s and up to produce a live baby.  
 
So what if it is indeed true?  What if the IVF rates, with purchased  eggs (euphemistically called ‘donated,’ but only very rarely does an older woman have a younger woman ready to ‘donate’ eggs for her) are just as good as the pregnancy rates for young women?  What if we just stop arguing the data, and say ‘so what?’  Is it a good thing that young and healthy women who want education and good careers cannot in any way, not in time nor in money nor in energy, afford children?  Is it a good thing for children to become a mid-life project?  Is it a good thing to conquer the biological clock for reproduction if the rest of the biological clock – the one for diabetes, stroke, dementia – keeps ticking?  We’ve had older men fathering children, often second-sets of them, as lovely late-life projects.  But those men usually had young wives to mother the kids, care for them through the aging and death of the father.  These delayed-childbearing women are less likely to have young partners to pick up the reins.  What are we wishing on our children?  And what are the costs for all of the women involved, the ones who delay, the ones who sell eggs, the ones who succeed in late-life baby-making and the ones who don’t?  

To listen to the interview, click here

Human Rights in Childbirth: a conference in the Hague.

For those who care about midwifery and home birth, the Netherlands has stood as a beacon of sanity, a light in the darkness, a ray of hope.  When all over the world midwives lost the power of an independent profession and became some kind of nurse or physician-extender, Dutch midwives remained Midwives.  When all over the world, women moved into hospitals for birth, Dutch women stayed home.  The story is more complicated (all stories always are) but over and over again, those of us arguing for home birth and for midwives turned to the Netherlands.  And we still do, but.... it's getting a bit precarious over there.  The home birth rate is down and dropping, the midwives are finding the appeal of shift work and turning over all the complicated cases to the doctors, the doctors are pushing for more control, the women are watching the same television as everyone else and expecting to be in agony and rescued by epidurals.  As midwives around the world face various forms of state-control, dramatically shown in the recent case of Agnes Gereb who was arrested for doing home births in Hungary, we turn, yet again to the Dutch, and hope they rise to the occasion. 


To learn about the conference, click here.
To read my contribution to the conference, click here.

Apr 3, 2012

Surrogacy, Israel, Hitchens….


I haven’t written about or seriously thought about surrogacy in a long time – just not ‘my issue.’  But I remember as clear as yesterday the first time I heard about it.  A reporter called me for a response to the then-new “Baby M” case, in which a hired-surrogate, Mary Beth Whitehead, changed her mind and tried to keep the baby, refusing to turn it over to the purchasing couple, the Sterns.   The reporter said it was all brand new as a case, and I should bear in mind that they hadn’t yet done paternity testing and so it was possible that Mr. Whitehead, not Mr. Stern, was the father.   I said, without a moment’s hesitation: “I don’t care who the father is, we know who the mother is!”  Show me a pregnant woman and I know just who the mother is.
And here I stand, position totally unchanged, almost 25 years and a lot of fancy technology later.  At that point, the pregnancy was created with the equivalent of the turkey-baster:  the purchaser’s semen was placed into the vagina by a medical provider using low-tech tools.  Now, precisely to avoid the kind of case Baby M represented, a lot of much fancier technology is used, to assure that the egg does not come from the hired-surrogate.  But truly, it was not a question of ovum-sourcing that made me see Marybeth Whitehead as the mother of the baby she’d carried and born. 
So for me, nothing’s changed, my position remains solid.  But out there in the world, a lot has changed: Surrogacy is a growth industry.  And like many industries, it profits from globalization:  outsourcing pregnancies to India, once as unimaginable as anything I could now imagine, is routine, fully industrialized and normalized.  And sadly too, like many industries, it comes with its own set of scandals.  A well-known ‘reproductive law specialist,’ popular on the media circuit, has just been sent to jail for what amounts to an even-more direct form of baby selling than is surrogacy.
But still, I’ve been happy to take a back seat, watch, sadly wag my head back and forth and sigh dramatically once in a while.  And then I was asked  to review a book by Elly Teman on the surrogacy industry in Israel. You can read the review here.  Or better yet, go read the book -- obviously Teman and I disagree about surrogacy, but she does write well.  That book got me way past sighing – it made me cry, made me throw things, made me seriously think about cancelling my big annual Passover seder.  I’m not religious enough to have a crisis of faith – but this created a bit of a crisis of identity for me.  That Jews, as Jews, in a Jewish state, applying the logic of Jewish patriarchy, could come up with the system they did – well, do I want to be any kind of a part of that? 

I rescued Passover – my hagaddah is something I’ve developed with family and friends over many years, reflective of our multinational, multiethnic identities, celebrating a human desire to be free of oppression.  And Surrogacy, as practiced in Israel, as practiced in India, cannot be understood as anything but a form of oppression.  Not to my thinking, anyway. 
And then, the review just published, a few letters and comments trickling in in response, I was pulling out my own copy of RECREATING MOTHERHOOD, the one place I did write about surrogacy, and an old review slipped out.  I looked at the photo of a young me, and looked too – with quite a bit of surprise – at the photo of the reviewer: Christopher Hitchens!  I’d forgotten that.  I read it again (and you can too, here), and saw that yes, that was a smart guy, yes he did get what I was saying, and oddest of all, he too connected  it to Israel , even if calling it a digression to “another contemporary controversy, the ‘Who is a Jew?’ debate”   It wasn’t a digression: it showed a true understanding of what this surrogacy business is all about.  Like traditional fatherhood in any patriarchy, the point of baby-making is for people of power to use oppressed people to grow their seeds into their progeny, do the labor, the dirty work, the hard work, and create a child who will bear the name and carry on the life and work and values of the oppressor.  Whether it is in the most traditional, religious framework in which the seed of Abraham can grow through any woman’s body, or in a post-feminist capitalist state in which rich women can hire poor women to be their ‘surrogates,’ this is an ugly business.  Hitchens was left with the ‘strong conviction that the argument could be more civilized if the profit motive could be eliminated from the process of conception. “ 
He said that showed what a na├»ve utopian he was – to me, it sadly showed how smart and how prescient he was. 
Maybe I’ll write more, maybe I’ll just go back to heavy sighing.  I’ll decide after Passover. 

Feb 29, 2012

Creating Eggs for Older Women: And for what problem is this the solution?


Another news headline out of the repro-science labs: they can --  maybe eventually, sorta, possibly -- get viable eggs from postmenopausal women.   Asked to chime in on the 'social implications' I have to first wrap my head around why women would want to become mothers in their 50's and 60's.  Is it because we've made it so hard to have kids in our 20's and 30's, when our bodies are most ready for it?  So -- call me crazy -- but might it not make more sense to solve that social problem rather than try to introduce a technological fix?


Listen on NPR
Listen on GrioMSNBC
Listen on WBUR

Jan 26, 2012

Whole Mother

Radio interview in Houston.

Listen

Nov 13, 2011

Talk: Splashing in New Waters: Beyond Second Wave Feminism

The first-ever joint conference of the Midwives Alliance of North America, the Canadian Association of Midwives and the American College of Nurse Midwives took place in Niagara Falls in November 2011.  I was present at the first-ever MANA conference (still have the t shirt!) and have been at most of the ones since.  It is one of the great honors and joys of my life that I was invited to do a plenary presentation at this meeting.   Talks are flexible, things come up, and I never could or would give a written-out version of a talk.  But here's the gist of what I had to say. 


click here to read the talk

Article: On Markens

This short article is from on a panel in response to a new book on Surrogacy by Susan Markens.  The book has the greatest cover -- a pregnant belly, barcoded.  It's a white pregnant belly on that cover -- the dark ones are cheaper.  Googling for Surrogacy to find the image, ads popped up first -- how to hire a surrogate, how to get work as one.  It's a business, and like so many American businesses, increasingly outsourced. 
 
The very concept of surrogacy continues to infuriate me -- Every pregnant woman is the mother of the baby in her belly.  I will stand by that no matter what technologies we develop, no matter whose genetic material is involved, no matter what she was thinking or planning (or not) when she got pregnant, and no matter what that woman chooses to do with that baby after it has left her body.  If she wants to stop being its mother at birth, place it for adoption, I'm as supportive as only an adoptive mother can be.  If she wants to sell it -- well, let's think about that.  I'm still not ready to endorse baby-selling, but there's an argument to be had.  But for me -- don't tell me it's not her baby while it's in her belly. 

Click here to read the article

Frau Dokter Katz Rothmann

For reasons I've written about, (see "Jews, Germans and Clones")  I've come to have a German audience.  A year or so ago, Hildburg Wegener, a feminist theologian, approached me about coming to give a talk on the occasion of the 25th anniversary of the publication of The Tentative Pregnancy.  25 years? seriously?  Did the math and yes, indeed.  I went to that meeting, met Germans who are still working hard on issues around prenatal testing, who are still worried about eugenics slipping in what Troy Duster called 'the back door,' the medical-testing route. 
After a really fascinating conference -- made all the more so because my son, Daniel Colb Rothman, joined me and was able to help me see, reflect, think about what was happening -- Hildburg spoke to me about doing a book aimed particularly for German audiences.  We went through just about all of my published work, articles, chapters in my own and others' books, essays, presentations, and Hildburg chose the chapters that would speak to Germans.  She's almost done with the translating, guided me through the editing, and the book is going to come out soon.  The jacket here is not quite the final version -- they have (charmingly) done what Germans seem to always do with my last name, and bestowed an extra n on Rothmann.  I've become rather fond of my German personna, Frau Doktor Katz Rothmann. 

Forthcoming, SCHONE NEUE WELT DER FORTPFLANZUNG: TEXTE ZU SCHWANGERSCHAFT, GEBURT UND GENDIAGNOSTIK, Mabuse-Verlag, Germany  Translation by Hildburg Wegener 

Mar 8, 2011

In the news: Huckabee's attack on Natalie Portman


Motherhood issues just never cease to fascinate the conservative politicians and the media.  At least Huckabee picked on an actual woman's "unwed motherhood" unlike Dan Quayle's attack on a fictional character's.


Read the article here.