Paper short abstract:

Based on a qualitative research, this presentation analyzes the legitimacy conflicts in which pregnancy and birth professionals find themselves regarding obstetric risks and how they face to different fears. Three forms of recurrent tensions are here examined, all of which opposing one risk to another.

Paper long abstract:

Based on a qualitative research, this presentation analyzes fears and legitimacy conflicts in which pregnancy and birth professionals find themselves regarding obstetric risks.

Perinatal field in France crystallizes a certain number of obstacles to user participation (policy decisions made without their input; medical acts done routinely in a context of low degrees of consent), and is simultaneously the subject of renewed social demand (medical legitimacy strongly challenged by associations, lawsuits, etc.). In this context, obstetrics health care professionals are especially anxious. In fact, medicalization of pregnancy, diagnostic and screening techniques increase uncertainty and medical decision appears very difficult and "uncomfortable".

The fact that professionals deal with two recipients (mother and child) whose anthropologic qualification differs, heightens the complexity of the dilemmas they are faced with. We will demonstrate that approaches vary according to clinical situations and judgment evaluations from its actors. This study shows that, faced with concurring obstetrical risks and anxieties, the options adopted by heath care professionals to evaluate and manage the uncertainty and risks rely on the definition they have of the health care recipients (woman, mother, patient, healthy people, embryo, child, potential plaintiff…). Three different forms of recurrent tensions are here examined, all of which opposing one risk to another: medical risk vs concurring medical risk, medical risk vs psychological or "cultural" risk, medical risk vs prosecutions risk.