Why was it more prevalent that women died during childbirth in the 18th Century?

Question: Why was it more prevalent that women died during childbirth in the 18th Century!?
Best Answer - Chosen by Asker:

Doctors did not keep hygienic like washing hands between examining patients etc!. a lot has been written on the subject!.

This desire for control led men to seek greater status as obstetricians in the nineteenth century!. The professionalization of obstetrics is one of the leading factors in the demise of midwifery!. Doctors sought to improve their status by proving midwives uneducated and unprepared for medical emergency!. This control over the birthing process came about with the increasing use of forceps in doctor attended births!. Forceps allowed the male doctor to deliver live babies where previously the child or the mother would have died!. Forceps were also used to shorten lengthy labor!. Because midwives were not allowed by custom to use medical instruments in their practice, forceps became the exclusive domain of physicians!. Childbirth started to become the expertise of men, instead of women!.

Forceps improved the status of physicians by easing birth and increasing the chances of a live birth!. A physician who used forceps in the majority of cases, necessary or not, would increase his chances of a successful and less painful birth!. Until the use of forceps, the only way to remove a fetus that couldn't pass through the birth canal was to perform a craniotomy!. Forceps represented the introduction of science to birth, the professionalization of physicians, the downfall of midwifery, and the loss of birth from women to men!. Catherine M!. Scholten writes!.!.!.

"[T]he time seemed ripe to apply science to a field hitherto built on ignorance and supported by prejudice!. Smellie [Dr!. William Smellie, discovered the mechanics of parturition, perfected the design and use of forceps, and taught their use] commented on the novelty of scientific interest in midwifery!. `We ought to be ashamed of ourselves !.!.!. for the little improvement we have made in so many centuries!.'"[8]
Thomas Jones of the College of Medicine of Maryland wrote in 1812, "With the cultivation of this branch of science women could now reasonably look to men for safety in the perilous conditions of childbirth!."[9]

What Jones failed to write about were the failures of the forceps to completely revolutionize childbirth!. Forceps sometimes saving the life of an infant who would have been killed, or sped up labor; however, they also caused as much injury as they prevented!. Forceps were responsible for rips in the perineum, head injuries to the fetus, and other obstetric complications!. The overuse of forceps was an acknowledged problem in the nineteenth century!. Accusations of "meddlesome midwifery" and cautions against forceps misuse suggest a serious problem existed!. William Potts Dewees, professor and the University of Pennsylvania, wrote, "The frequency with which [forceps] have been employed in some instances is really alarming, and I had like to have said, must have been to often unnecessary!." Another physician writing in the 1880s wrote "grave perineal lesions were more common now than formerly, and this increase has been coincident with the increased use of forceps and of anesthetics in labor!."[10]

The increase of dangers to women was due to other interventions by physicians as well!. Since most labor proceeded normally, any intervention introduced dangers that weren't already present!. Germ theory was not yet in place, and doctors did not take action to sterilize themselves or the area they were in!. Unwashed hands posed major threats to women's health, often carrying disease from other patients the doctor had examined!. Some physicians also routinely used opium and other narcotics, and ruptured the water with their fingernails!. These actions also placed unknown and previously nonexistent dangers to women!.

Women, unlike the midwives who were being forced !.!.!.!.!.!.
http://www!.cyberbuzz!.gatech!.edu/nar/win9!.!.!.
http://eh!.net/encyclopedia/article/haine!.!.!.
http://links!.jstor!.org/sici!?sici=0022-45!.!.!.
http://www!.mc!.maricopa!.edu/dept/d46/psy/!.!.!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Well, duh!.!.!.
No prenatal care, no hospitals, no anesthesia, no intensive care, no antibiotics, no blood transfusions, no emergency cesarean section!.!.!.!.!.
Just a midwife and some towels!.!.!.!.!.
Having a baby "naturally" is extremely dangerous, and in the olden days a woman was as likely as not to die in childbirth at some point during her life!. Nowadays, it is almost unheard of to die in childbirth!.
The life expectancy of most people was around 40 anyway, both male and female!. Thanks to modern medicine, we live twice that long!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Because they didn't understand about infection!. Lots of women became infected after giving birth due to the terrible conditions!.
also doctors would perform autopsies on infected bodies then go and examine women in labour or shortly after childbirth without washing their hands!. Therefore passing on infections!.
I'm reading a book at the moment which is partially based in the 1800's and the main character has taken on her neice after her sister died from infection shortly after giving birth!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

During the 18th century (meaning the 1700s), doctors and mid-wives could generally cope with simple childbirths, but could rarely handle the complicated deliveries!. They didn't have the knowledge, the hospital facilities, or the medicines!. Medical situations, such as incompatibilities between the blood type of the mother and that of the baby, would often result in the death of both!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

18th century, from 1700 to 1799!.!.!. Forceps were not used then, or rather started to be used at the tail end of that century!. Medicine was barely starting to be more scientific, midwifery held no interest to all those (male) doctors busy rummaging in the innards of their patients to see how they could heal them, there was no anesthetics, no hygiene, and any woman who had had a few children could call herself a midwife on the basis of her experience!. Knowledge was empirical rather than scientific and the doctors who had autopsied pregnant women certainly wouldn't have wasted their time giving their new knowledge to midwives who couldn't even read!. Besides, dying in childbirth was considered one of the routine dangers of being a married woman!. And yes, many women did die in childbirth, for proof look at the number of known men who married two or three times in their life, after losing their wife, multiply this by the number of married men in the population!.!.!.
Many of the problems that killed those women can now be dealt with speedily by competent midwives and doctors!.!.!. in countries with a good health system!. Women continue to die in great number in very poor countries, just like the women in the 18th century!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

One of the big reasons was that doctors would go from patient to patient without washing their hands!. Whatever they picked up from one they passed to all!. Even if the woman successfully had her baby, she would often die due to infection!.

Add to that the poor health conditions, bad teeth that were frequently infected, poor nutrition, and poor sanitation, and you lost a lot of babies and mothers!.

About the only assist a doctor could do was to use forceps to pull the kid out!. And that was kept secret by one family so unless you were their patient, you were out of luck!. C-sections were a last ditch effort and in most cases the mother or baby or both died!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

I would think it had something to do with the fact that life, and living conditions, were very different in those days!. Woman had many more children, sometimes very close together, attended by an older woman in the community, a midwife, or whatever other woman was available!. Certainly medical care was not available to most women, and medical care for "women's problems" was pretty well non-existent at any rate!.
Many of my pioneering ancestors had very large families, 10, 12, 14 children!. Most of them seemed to come along every two years!. Those who died in childbirth tended to be delivering a sixth or seventh child within a year of the previous one and I think that may well explain the unfortunate outcome!.
All this information about forceps and doctors taking over from midwives is very interesting !.!.!. but I don't know what country had such an 18th century experience!. Country people in Canada were still having their babies at home well into the 20th century!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

1) Lack of sanitation

2) No drugs to assist, therefore labour was exhausting and if the woman had a weak heart, there would be nothing to help!.

3) The labour was complicated, (baby too big) it got stuck in the birthing canal and the child's head was often crushed in an attempt to save the mother, by means of forceps!. During which untold damage could be done to the mother!.

4) No antibiotics or blood transfusions!. Infection could and did set in, and if blood was lost, there was no way to replace lost blood

5) After birth ( if she survived) she was encouraged to lie in bed for some time, increasing the risks of blood clots!.

And the list continues from thisWww@QuestionHome@Com

The answers that you have regarding sanitation and infection are somewhat viable if not tempting, but women have been known to give birth in evironments that would be considered unsanitary!.

They have given birth in tents, in the forest, in wagons, ditches, stairwells, bathrooms, prisons, taxi cabs, buses, and of course the most unsanitary place of all!.!.!. HOSPITALS!

Norman's response is well worth the read and his question quite valid!. "How do you know!?"

My questions would be regarding location(s), method of the data collected, the age sample, the employment and living conditions of the individuals, and most important the entity responsible for the survey!.

Thank you Norman, because too often the temptation to "armchair" prevails without significant inspection of the question!. Sometimes we just need to question the question!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Medicine hadn't yet developed the Germ Theory of disease!. Not only were there no anti-biotics at all, the need for them hadn't even been realized!.

Add to this that there were no blood transfusions back then; blood grouping hadn't been discovered either!.

Another factor is a general lack of sanitation!. Very few places had running water of any kind, and there was no such thing as sewage outflow!. Cleanliness was fairly minimal!.

Add all this up, and you get a lot of death from blood loss and primary and secondary infection!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

How do you know that!?!?!?!. I am shore you are going to tell me that because THEY SAID SO and or YOU READ IT IN A BOOK!. well do you believe every thing you read!?!?!?!. Years ago there was a lot of Midwifes and they were who brought most children in this world, #1 There was not any drug been injected in children to have them deformed when they are born and I can go on, & on, & on!. but I wont so dont believed every thing you here or read!. You should used your COMPUTER as well to think for your self, and I do not mean this computer @ all!. I mean your brain!. You should THINK for your
self some times OK !?!?!?!? I hope more of us would start thinking for our self some time!. GOOD LUCK TO YOU!.>>>!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

They didn't have the medical advances we have today, including giving birth in a completely sterilized environment!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Lack of hygiene led to septicaemiaWww@QuestionHome@Com

Bad medicineWww@QuestionHome@Com

They didn't have many of the technical things we have today!.Www@QuestionHome@Com