宗教对产科手术的反对?19世纪中期法国产科麻醉的历史研究。

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q3 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Rebecca E Chernick, Manisha S Desai
{"title":"宗教对产科手术的反对?19世纪中期法国产科麻醉的历史研究。","authors":"Rebecca E Chernick, Manisha S Desai","doi":"10.1177/0310057X251337754","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>An early administration of anaesthesia for childbirth occurred on 19 January 1847, when Scottish obstetrician James Young Simpson administered diethyl ether to facilitate the delivery of a child to a woman with a deformed pelvis. Simpson advocated for its use to reduce pain both in surgery and in childbirth. Obstetric anaesthesia was controversial for many reasons, and objections came not only from fellow obstetricians, but also from the public and members of the clergy. While James Young Simpson shed light upon religious objections to obstetric anaesthesia, modern scholars have debated whether such objections truly existed. The aim of this study is to determine whether religious objections to obstetric anaesthesia were endorsed by medical professionals in France during the mid-19th century. A search of the Bibliothèque Nationale de France (National Library of France) was conducted. Primary source documents reveal that French physicians were interested in studying the effects of ether and chloroform during labour and delivery. Nevertheless, the introduction of obstetric anaesthesia was controversial for many reasons, including concerns about its effect on natural labour. The evidence suggests that these objections were not endorsed by the medical community. Much of the controversy surrounding obstetric anaesthesia involved the perceived necessity of the practice during low-risk vaginal deliveries. It appears that French physicians were aware of religious objections to the use of anaesthesia in childbirth but did not endorse them. The use of obstetric anaesthesia in France was guided by scientific evidence and clinical experience, without interference from religious leaders.</p>","PeriodicalId":7746,"journal":{"name":"Anaesthesia and Intensive Care","volume":" ","pages":"310057X251337754"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Religious objections to obstetric practice? A historical study of obstetric anaesthesia in mid-19th century France.\",\"authors\":\"Rebecca E Chernick, Manisha S Desai\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/0310057X251337754\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>An early administration of anaesthesia for childbirth occurred on 19 January 1847, when Scottish obstetrician James Young Simpson administered diethyl ether to facilitate the delivery of a child to a woman with a deformed pelvis. Simpson advocated for its use to reduce pain both in surgery and in childbirth. Obstetric anaesthesia was controversial for many reasons, and objections came not only from fellow obstetricians, but also from the public and members of the clergy. While James Young Simpson shed light upon religious objections to obstetric anaesthesia, modern scholars have debated whether such objections truly existed. The aim of this study is to determine whether religious objections to obstetric anaesthesia were endorsed by medical professionals in France during the mid-19th century. A search of the Bibliothèque Nationale de France (National Library of France) was conducted. Primary source documents reveal that French physicians were interested in studying the effects of ether and chloroform during labour and delivery. Nevertheless, the introduction of obstetric anaesthesia was controversial for many reasons, including concerns about its effect on natural labour. The evidence suggests that these objections were not endorsed by the medical community. Much of the controversy surrounding obstetric anaesthesia involved the perceived necessity of the practice during low-risk vaginal deliveries. It appears that French physicians were aware of religious objections to the use of anaesthesia in childbirth but did not endorse them. The use of obstetric anaesthesia in France was guided by scientific evidence and clinical experience, without interference from religious leaders.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7746,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Anaesthesia and Intensive Care\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"310057X251337754\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Anaesthesia and Intensive Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/0310057X251337754\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anaesthesia and Intensive Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0310057X251337754","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

1847年1月19日,苏格兰产科医生詹姆斯·杨·辛普森(James Young Simpson)为一名骨盆畸形的妇女使用了乙醚,这是分娩麻醉的早期应用。辛普森提倡使用它来减轻手术和分娩时的疼痛。产科麻醉有很多争议,反对意见不仅来自产科医生同行,也来自公众和神职人员。虽然詹姆士·杨·辛普森(James Young Simpson)阐明了宗教对产科麻醉的反对意见,但现代学者们一直在争论这种反对意见是否真的存在。这项研究的目的是确定19世纪中期法国的医疗专业人员是否赞同对产科麻醉的宗教反对。对法国国家图书馆(法国国家图书馆)进行了检索。原始资料显示,法国医生对研究乙醚和氯仿在分娩过程中的作用很感兴趣。然而,由于许多原因,产科麻醉的引入存在争议,包括对其对自然分娩的影响的担忧。证据表明,这些反对意见并未得到医学界的认可。许多围绕产科麻醉的争议涉及到在低风险阴道分娩中实践的感知必要性。法国医生似乎意识到宗教反对在分娩时使用麻醉剂,但并不赞同。在法国,产科麻醉的使用以科学证据和临床经验为指导,没有宗教领袖的干预。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Religious objections to obstetric practice? A historical study of obstetric anaesthesia in mid-19th century France.

An early administration of anaesthesia for childbirth occurred on 19 January 1847, when Scottish obstetrician James Young Simpson administered diethyl ether to facilitate the delivery of a child to a woman with a deformed pelvis. Simpson advocated for its use to reduce pain both in surgery and in childbirth. Obstetric anaesthesia was controversial for many reasons, and objections came not only from fellow obstetricians, but also from the public and members of the clergy. While James Young Simpson shed light upon religious objections to obstetric anaesthesia, modern scholars have debated whether such objections truly existed. The aim of this study is to determine whether religious objections to obstetric anaesthesia were endorsed by medical professionals in France during the mid-19th century. A search of the Bibliothèque Nationale de France (National Library of France) was conducted. Primary source documents reveal that French physicians were interested in studying the effects of ether and chloroform during labour and delivery. Nevertheless, the introduction of obstetric anaesthesia was controversial for many reasons, including concerns about its effect on natural labour. The evidence suggests that these objections were not endorsed by the medical community. Much of the controversy surrounding obstetric anaesthesia involved the perceived necessity of the practice during low-risk vaginal deliveries. It appears that French physicians were aware of religious objections to the use of anaesthesia in childbirth but did not endorse them. The use of obstetric anaesthesia in France was guided by scientific evidence and clinical experience, without interference from religious leaders.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
13.30%
发文量
150
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Anaesthesia and Intensive Care is an international journal publishing timely, peer reviewed articles that have educational value and scientific merit for clinicians and researchers associated with anaesthesia, intensive care medicine, and pain medicine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信