Risk and boundary work in contemporary maternity care: tensions and consequences

References

• Abbott, A. (1988). The system of the professions. London: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Alaszewski, A. (2016). Risk, medicine and health. In A. Burgess, A. Alemanno, & J. Zinn (Eds.), Routledge handbook of risk studies (pp. 231–240). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Alaszewski, A., & Brown, P. (2012). Making health policy: A critical introduction. Cambridge: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Alemanno, A. (2016). Risk and regulation. In A. Burgess, A. Alemanno, & J. Zinn (Eds.), Routledge handbook of risk studies (pp. 191–203). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Allen, D. (2001a). Narrating nursing jurisdiction: ‘atrocity stories’ and ‘boundary work’. Symbolic Interaction, 24(1), 75–103.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allen, D. (2001b). The changing shape of nursing practice: The role of nurses in the hospital division of labour. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Arulkumaran, S. (2010). Clinical governance and standards in UK maternity care to improve quality and safety. Midwifery, 26, 485–487.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aven, T., & Renn, O. (2010). Risk management and governance: Concepts, guidelines and applications (Vol. 16). Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media.
   Google Scholar
• Beck, U. (1992). Risk society: Towards a new modernity. London: SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Beddoe, L. (2010). Surveillance or reflection: Professional supervision in ‘the risk society’. British Journal of Social Work, 40(4), 1279–1296.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bogdan-Lovis, E., & Sousa, A. (2006). The contextual influence of professional culture: Certified nurse-midwives’ knowledge of and reliance on evidence-based practice. Social Science & Medicine, 62(11), 2681–2693.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burgess, A. (2016). Introduction. In A. Burgess, A. Alemanno, & J. Zinn (Eds.), Routledge handbook of risk studies (pp. 1–14). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Coxon, K. (2014). Risk in pregnancy and birth: Are we talking to ourselves? Health, Risk & Society, 16(6), 481–493.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coxon, K., Scamell, M., & Alaszewski, A. (2012). Risk, pregnancy and childbirth: What do we currently know and what do we need to know? An editorial. Health, Risk & Society, 14(6), 503–510.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis-Floyd, R., & Sargent, C. (1997). Childbirth and authoritative knowledge. Cross cultural perspectives. London: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Denzin, N. (1996). Interpretive ethnography. Ethnographic practices for the 21st century. London: SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Department of Health. (2005). Research governance framework for health and social care. Retrieved May 25, 2017, from https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/139566/dh_088288.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Donnison, J. (1988). Midwives and medical men. London: Historical Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Douglas, M. (1990). Risk as a forensic resource. Daedalus. Journal of the American Academy of Arts and Science, 119(4), 1–16. Retrieved November 28, 2016, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/20025335?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
   Google Scholar
• Douglas, M. (1992). Risk and blame: Essays in cultural theory. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Gale, N., Greenfield, S., Gill, P., Gutridge, K., & Marshall, T. (2011). Patient and general practitioner attitudes to taking medication to prevent cardiovascular disease after receiving detailed information on risks and benefits of treatment: A qualitative study. BMC Family Practice, 12, 59.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gale, N., Thomas, G., Thwaites, R., Greenfield, S., & Brown, P. (2016). Towards a sociology of risk work: A narrative review and synthesis. Sociology Compass, 10(11), 1046–1071.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures: Selected essays. New York, NY: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Hammersley, M., & Atkinson, P. (2007). Ethnography: Principles in practice (3rd ed.). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Harrison, S., & McDonald, R. (2008). The politics of health care in Britain. London: SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Health Research Authority. (2016). HRA approval. Retrieved August 21, 2017, from http://www.hra.nhs.uk/research-community/applying-for-approvals/hra-approval/
   Google Scholar
• Healy, S., Humphreys, E., & Kennedy, C. (2016). Midwives’ and obstetricians’ perceptions of risk and its impact on clinical practice and decision-making in labour: An integrative review. Women and Birth, 29(2), 107–116.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hofmann, D., & Stetzer, A. (1998). The role of safety climate and communication in accident interpretation: Implications for learning from negative events. Academy of Management Journal, 41(6), 644–657.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horlick-Jones, T. (2005). On ‘risk-work’: Professional discourse, accountability and everyday action. Health, Risk & Society, 7(3), 293–307.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hughes, E. (1958). Men and their work. IL: The Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hughes, E. (1971/1984). The sociological eye. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
   Google Scholar
• Hutter, B. (2008). Risk regulation and health care. Health, Risk & Society, 10(1), 1–7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jamous, H., & Peloille, B. (1970). Changes in the French university-hospital system. In J. Jackson (Ed.), Professions and professionalisation (pp. 109–152). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, T. (1972). Professions and power. London: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2009). Interviews. Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. London: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Lankshear, G., Ettorre, E., & Mason, D. (2005). Decision-making, uncertainty and risk: Exploring the complexity of work processes in NHS delivery suites. Health, Risk & Society, 7(4), 361–377.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larkin, G. (1983). Occupational monopoly and modern medicine. London: Tavistock Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Larson, M. (1977). The rise of professionalism: A sociological analysis. London: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Low, J. (2013). Unstructured and semi-structured interviews in health research. In M. Saks & J. Allsop (Eds.), Researching health: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods (2nd ed., pp. 74–91). London: SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar
• MacKenzie Bryers, H., & van Teijlingen, E. (2010). Risk, theory, social and medical models: A critical analysis of the concept of risk in maternity care. Midwifery, 26, 488–496.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, G., Currie, G., & Finn, R. (2009). Reconfiguring or reproducing intra-professional boundaries? Specialist expertise, generalist knowledge and the ‘modernization’ of the medical workforce. Social Science & Medicine, 68(7), 1191–1198.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• May, T. (2011). Social research. Issues, methods and process (4th ed.). Berkshire: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Midwifery 2020. (2010). Midwifery 2020: Delivering expectations. Retrieved November 28, 2016, from http://www.midwifery2020.org/documents/MW2020_EXEC_SUMMARY_MS_WEB.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Munro, J., & Spiby, H. (2010). The nature and use of evidence in midwifery. In H. Spiby & J. Munro (Eds.), Evidence based midwifery: Applications in context (pp. 1–16). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Nancarrow, S., & Borthwick, A. (2005). Dynamic professional boundaries in the healthcare workforce. Sociology of Health and Illness, 27(7), 897–919.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NHS Litigation Authority. (2014). NHS litigation authority annual report and accounts 2015/16. Resolve and learn. Retrieved November 28, 2016, from http://www.nhsla.com/AboutUs/Documents/NHS_Litigation_Authority_Annual_Report_and_Accounts_2015-2016.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Nursing & Midwifery Council. (2012). Midwives rules and standards. London: NMC. Retrieved June 22, 2015, from www.nmc.org.uk
   Google Scholar
• O’Reilly, K. (2012). Ethnographic methods (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Pettersen, K. (2016). Understanding uncertainty: Thinking through in relation to high-risk technologies. In A. Burgess, A. Alemanno, & J. Zinn (Eds.), Routledge handbook of risk studies (pp. 39–48). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Professional Standards Authority. (2015a). Right-touch regulation. Retrieved November 28, 2016, from http://www.professionalstandards.org.uk/docs/default-source/publications/thought-paper/right-touch-regulation-2015.pdf?sfvrsn=12
   Google Scholar
• Professional Standards Authority. (2015b). Rethinking regulation. Retrieved November 28, 2016, from http://www.professionalstandards.org.uk/docs/default-source/publications/thought-paper/rethinking-regulation-2015.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Professional Standards Authority. (2016). Regulation rethought. Retrieved November 28, 2016, from http://www.professionalstandards.org.uk/docs/default-source/publications/thought-paper/regulation-rethought.pdf?sfvrsn=10
   Google Scholar
• Rothman, B. (2014). Pregnancy, birth and risk: An introduction. Health, Risk & Society, 16(1), 1–6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandall, J., Morton, C., & Bick, D. (2010). Safety in childbirth and the three ‘C’s: Community, context and culture. Midwifery, 26(5), 481–482.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scamell, M. (2011). The swan effect in midwifery talk and practice: A tension between normality and the language of risk. Sociology of Health & Illness, 33(7), 987–1001.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scamell, M. (2014). Childbirth within the risk society. Sociology Compass, 8(7), 917–928.
   Google Scholar
• Scamell, M. (2016). The fear factor of risk – Clinical governance and midwifery talk and practice in the UK. Midwifery, 38, 14–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scamell, M., & Alaszewski, A. (2012). Fateful moments and the categorisation of risk: Midwifery practice and the ever-narrowing window of normality during childbirth. Health, Risk & Society, 14(2), 207–221.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scamell, M., & Alaszewski, A. (2016). Choice, risk, and moral judgment: Using discourse analysis to identify the moral component of midwives’ discourses. In J. Crichton, C. Candlin, & A. Firkins (Eds.), Communicating risk. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Scamell, M., & Stewart, M. (2014). Time, risk and midwife practice: The vaginal examination. Health, Risk & Society, 16(1), 84–100.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seibold, C., Licqurish, S., Rolls, C., & Hopkins, F. (2010). Lending the space: Midwives perceptions of birth space and clinical risk management. Midwifery, 26, 526–531.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shirley, J., & Padgett, S. (2006). An analysis of the discourse of professionalism. In D. Wear & J. Aultman (Eds.), Professionalism in medicine: Critical perspective (pp. 25–42). New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Timmons, S., & Tanner, J. (2004). A disputed occupational boundary: Operating theatre nurses and operating department practitioners. Sociology of Health and Illness, 26(5), 645–666.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Maanen, J. (1995). An end to innocence: The ethnography of ethnography. In J. Van Maanen (Ed.), Representation in ethnography (pp. 1–35). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Van Maanen, J. (2011a). The tales of the field: On writing ethnography (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Van Maanen, J. (2011b). Ethnography as work: Some rules of engagement. Journal of Management Studies, 48(1), 218–234.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watson, T. (2011). Ethnography, reality, and truth: The vital need for studies of ‘how things work’ in organizations and management. Journal of Management Studies, 48(1), 202–217.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Witz, A. (1992). Professions and patriarchy. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Ybema, S., & Kamsteeg, F. (2009). Making the familiar strange: A case for disengaged organizational ethnography. In S. Ybema, D. Yanow, H. Wels, & F. Kamsteeg (Eds.), Organizational ethnography. Studying the complexities of everyday life (pp. 101–119). London: SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar