Jump to content

Talk:Symphysiotomy

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Recent edits

[edit]

I believe the article needs attention of an expert due to the recent, possibly partisan edits by User:RuadhanMac - Mike Rosoft (talk) 19:30, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I have marked the article for violating WP:NPOV. Given that RuadhanMac (talk · contribs) has also created an article on Survivors of Symphysiotomy, the survivors' advocacy group, I suspect that some serious advocacy is going on here. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 19:33, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The following comment was made on User talk:WikiDan61 but applies to this discussion, and so has been copied for complete discussion.
Hi, I have notice that you have referred my editing of the symphysiotomy page for scrutiny. Absolutely every assertion that is made is referenced and is verifiable by clicking on the references. If there is a single statement, which falls outside of journalistic or media reports, please let me know. Many thanks, RuadhanMac — Preceding unsigned comment added by RuadhanMac (talk • contribs) 19:45, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that media references are available does not guarantee that neutrality has been maintained. Many of the citations are to a Google docs document written by Marie O'Connor, who is the chairperson of Survivors of Symphysiotomy. The neutrality of this source must be questioned. Also, one may pick and choose one's sources to give an unbalanced view of the subject, which may or may not be the case here (I am not familiar enough with the topic to say). This is why expert opinions are called for.
I don't disagree with the banning of this practice; only with the undue weight given to the events in Ireland. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 20:11, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The contents of Ms O'Connor's report must be read prior to making decision. The statements on the history of the operation are referenced in Ms O'Connor's report. Again, if one can establish any actual factual misrepresentation please point this out. It's important to note for the purposes of the expert review that all writing on the subject is tendacious by its nature: doctors who wrote about the practice were advocates of it.

If you wish I can provide of redacted redacted obstetric reports condemning the practice. But I would also advise you or whoever it is to read the contents of the Kearney decision, which is a decision of the Irish Supreme Court.

On the issue of selectivity, I cant see what has been left out in terms of the Government response or handling of the issue. All statements derive from media reports which surrounds the Government's handling of this scandal.

In relation to giving Ireland undue weight, you must consider that Ireland was the only country in the Western World to have revived the practice: in no other country has symphystiomy been performed. This is why it's significant. It's a bit like mentioning anti-semitism but saying we shouldnt give undue weight to what happened in Germany during WW2.

The other point is that there is no campaign to have the operation banned: it's no longer used in Ireland, it was never used in the Western World in the 20th century, which is something that hospitals or health officials have never disputed. The only place it has been performed in recent decades is Sub-Saharan Africa where there is no access to hospitals to perform c-section.

RuadhanMac

  • This source is horrendously partisan and is completely inappropriate on which to base swathes of this article. I have removed it an information attributed to it. I have also removed many mentions of the group Survivors of Symphysiotomy, as the vast majority of the sources use do not actually mention this group. Finally, I have replaced the lead as it appeared before RuadhanMac's partisan re-write, as the re-write is poorly written, clearly not neutral and relies heavily on partisan sources. I have left the majority of the body of information intact. Basalisk inspect damage⁄berate 17:23, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nevertheless, the article gives an idea about the practice of symphysiotomy(a procedure which I as a medical student is frowned upon if I say in my viva).Advait2163 (talk) 14:27, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Create a fork of "Symphysiotomy controversy in Ireland"?

[edit]

Is the Ireland story is a big enough topic on its own. Perhaps keep this article as short description of the medical procedure and some history and move the Ireland story to a new article? Just looking for comments... I'm not necessarily convinced that is the right thing to do yet. —Noah 18:53, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep it as a separate section for now. Google news has three (1 2 3) articles from today, there will need to be a re-write to sections and we don't know if there are enough general refs that refer to patient outcomes and experiences. Some refs that discuss the operation in the third world also discuss the ongoing Irish legal cases. -- Aronzak (talk) 01:17, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Many years later... yes, needs a fork. Mvolz (talk) 10:39, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Coming back to this; this is a medical article and these sources just don't meet wp:medrs. I think this either needs fork to a different article type that doesn't require sources be medically accurate, or I'm going to have to delete most of this section. Mvolz (talk) 07:22, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vaginal Delivery proof of womanhood

[edit]

I'll try and avoid SYNTH and use longer quotes from the ref I added.

  • "socio-cultural need to achieve a vaginal delivery under difficult circumstances" "Symphysiotomy has a role in the management of cephalopelvic disproportion, being an example of appropriate technology. It fulfils the sociocultural needs of achieving vaginal delivery in areas in which Caesarean birth is a much disliked option involving a woman's disgrace in failure to give birth in the normal way."
  • In rural hospital and in communities where sympysiotomy is still being performed, it is evident that it is preferred to caesarean section because of the socio-cultural desire to achieve a vaginal delivery. This paper highlights our experiences with symphysiotomy in a rural Roman Catholic hospital providing evidence on the safety of symphysiotomy "The procedure is not done in any Nigerian tertiary and specialist hospitals. It is however still being practiced in certain missionary hospitals by European missionary doctors and their trained Nigerian doctors. Studies have shown that symphysiotomy is preferred to caesarean section in those communities in Nigeria where European missionary doctors and trained Nigerian doctors continue to practice the procedure" "Sacred Heart Hospital (SHH), Obudu is a rural 250-bed Roman Catholic Missionary hospital. It was very popular in the resource-poor communities of approximately 1 million people in the northern part of Cross River State, southern part of Benue State and south west region of Cameroon. The hospital was built in 1950 by Irish medical missionary of Mary (MMM). Symphysiotomy procedure was discontinued in 1990 with the exit of the medical missionaries, and the trained Nigerian doctors, when the hospital was officially handed over to the Roman Catholic Diocese of Ogoja. The procedure was performed for mild-moderate cephalopelvic disproportion with delivery of the head assisted with the vacuum extractor. It was also indicated in primigravidae with breech presentation in labour to prevent entrapment of the after-coming head. The other criteria for selection was alive fetus, advanced cervical dilatation, and a well engaged fetal head, ≤ 3/5th head palpable per abdomen. It was a popular procedure among the women in Obudu who preferred it to caesarean section and referred to it in the local language (Bete) as “operation to open the waist”. It was affordable, accepted, with minimal cost to the patients and with minimal post-operative complications.
  • ispub "There is a general aversion to operative delivery amongst Nigerian pregnant women largely because of the belief among some of our women that Caesarean delivery represents reproductive failure whereas vaginal delivery is a proof of womanhood"
  • In Nigeria, the case against caesarean delivery is made worse by a combination of the cultural perception that caesarean delivery represents reproductive failure
  • "resource poor setting where sociocultural aversion to Cesarean delivery is common" "The clear preference for vaginal delivery (90.1%) among the women was expected due to strong cultural aversion for Cesarean delivery, which even formal education does not seem to alter."
  • WHO "vaginal delivery is seen as the badge of acceptance into womanhood"
If it were true that it can be done "minimal post-operative complications" in contemporary Nigeria, while it was somehow impossible just half a century ago in Ireland, that would be interesting. However, this doesn't change the fact that Catholic teaching doesn't mandate avoiding caesareans, it simply mandates not having a hysterectomy where a non-Catholic doctor might advise one, so the situation is different. In Nigeria, it may be better to help in the way that the patients accept; in Ireland, the whole affair seems to have just been a failed attempt to devise a brave new practice instead of simply avoiding the unacceptable hysterectomy. 195.187.108.4 (talk) 12:24, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Symphysiotomy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:38, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Symphysiotomy&oldid=1240783842"