How does social media influence expectations, decision making and experiences of childbirth?

Author:

Lawrence Victoria1,Richardson Sonia1,Philp Lauren1

Affiliation:

1. University of the West of England

Abstract

Background/Aims Ideological perceptions of normal, physiological birth can be potentially dangerous. Clinicians highlighted to the Health and Social Care Committee how social media affects this, believing that the ‘pressure’ of social media contributing to ‘a big expectation of normality’ among expectant parents. This review's aims were to explore the available literature to support this statement and provide a contemporary insight that incorporates the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods This review was a qualitative meta-synthesis of literature identified in April 2022 using seven subject specific electronic databases: CINAHL Plus, MEDLINE, AMED, APA PsychInfo, APA PyschArt, MIDIRS and The British Nursing Database. Five qualitative primary research papers were critiqued and summarised. Results The first theme was focused on how social media reshapes and marginalises narratives of birth; the dominant narrative of medicalised birth is reinforced, but the curated narrative around physiological birth can also be problematic. The second theme encompassed how social media alters women's autonomy and agency in decision making about birth by affecting information sharing and their sense of connection. Conclusions Social media can contribute to an ideological perception of normal birth, creating additional pressures on women. However, a medicalised portrayal of birth, which women conform to, dominates these spaces. Social media both supports, and threatens, women's ability to make informed decisions about childbirth.

Publisher

Mark Allen Group

Subject

Maternity and Midwifery

Reference37 articles.

1. Searching and synthesising ‘grey literature’ and ‘grey information’ in public health: critical reflections on three case studies

2. Twenty-Five Years of Social Media: A Review of Social Media Applications and Definitions from 1994 to 2019

3. Aveyard H. Doing a literature review in health and social care. Maidenhead: Open University Press; 2019

4. Aveyard H, Sharp P. A beginners guide to evidence based practice in health and social care. Maidenhead: Open University Press; 2007

Cited by 3 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3