An articulation of the standpoint of peer support workers to inform childbearing program supports in Manitoba First Nation communities: institutional ethnography as de- colonizing methodology
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The cycle ofcontinuous crealion is the very basis ofrvhal we know as human beings.That's rvhy rve're on this planet (as Aboriginal people), to kep the vay ofthe teachings ofour original ancestors alive, to continue to do those things, our original instruclions.Birth is a paa ofall of that, and all the things we choose to \vork on as human beings are based on the gns that we receive rvhen rve come inlo this rvorld.There are teachings in that birlhing experience that can tell you about the purpose ofthat child's life... Based on the knorvledges from different medicine ways, you have an interpretive famework to use.That's essentialy what we're trying to maintain and build upon and carry rvith us as one ofthe lhings we use in our families so that our people can live (Cook,2000).However, in more modem times, childbearing health and wellbeing has swayed from one ofpersonal and community role and responsibility and the interconnectedness of life itselfto one entailing a complicated anay of medical assessment and risk intervention.Medical experts including obstetricians, family practitioners and nurses, as well as medical support \vorkers and./or paraprofessionals such as community health representatives, social 'vorkers and prenatal peer support workers deliver a web of programming aimed at 'roviding", "supporting", "empowering", "educating" and "building capacities of' women regarding pregnancy health and particnlarly proper nutrition and other lifestyle choices.The current protocol demands intervention by extemally trained professionals proflcient in the administration of westem scientific methodology and techniques and, oftentimes, skilled in the uses of complex and expensve technologies not accessible at remote community levels, fostering a never- ending dependency that promises end goals of self-sufficiency and health not obtainable tkough such means.The nedicalzaton of pregnancy and childbirth has received a considerable amount ofattention in the medical and social scientific literature.lNonetheless, a reality persists wherein childbearing is perceived and experienced as a medical event requiring extemal intervention.lnstitutional discourses describe Canadian First Nation women as a group ofpeople who share an inordinate disease burden and require the lion's share of medical intervention.Elders, midwives and other First Nation men and women refuse to agree with these perceptionsthey ask, where is the evidence that First Nation women and/or their infants are at greater risk than other women and infants in Canada?Of rvhat exactly are they at greater risk?Other eactions to medicalization policies and practices include the desire to be left alone to rebuild communities as per traditional/cultural values and imperatives and/or the need for support in the area of economic development rather than social assistance.My purpose in the present dissertation is to unravel system discourses in an effort to retrieve the 'truth' as it is lived and experience-articulated by First Nation women living in Manitoba First Nation communities today.The specific task of the study is to I For examples to lhis extensive and fascinating research, especially as it pefains to cooptation and control, cultural vs. medical issues and lvomen's rights ofpassage, please see the works of Betty Allne Daviss-putt and Lesley Paulette riting in the late 1980s on childbirth in tbe Canadian north.See also Chatwood-
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».