Analyzing Genres

Analyzing popular and professional genres: Views of labor induction using pitocin

Popular genre and professional genre are two opposing means of communication.  The articles of the two different genres discussed in this paper focus on the controversy of the drug Pitocin that is currently used to induce labor in women.  Two different genres, popular and professional are compared in the analysis of four different articles on labor induction.  The article entitled “Labor induction” is popular genre and was obtained online from Wikipedia encyclopedia.  The other popular genre article is called “How to prepare for labor” by contributor Laura O’Neill from the online website eHow Health.  To compare the popular genre to a professional genre, two articles were pulled to represent professional genre.  The first is titled “Modern childbirth: Failure to progress” by Sarah Blustein from The Women’s Review of Books, volume 24, number 4.  The second article is “The vanishing mother” written by Claire L. Wendland from the department of Anthropolgy at the University of Wisconsin, Madison and is featured in Medical anthropology quarterly, volume 21, issue 2.  By comparing these articles we are able to analyze the popular and professional genres that discuss labor induction and childbirth.

            The two articles in the popular genre focus on the process of labor induction with Pitocin and outline the process of labor induction and the risks associated with using Pitocin to jumpstart uterine contractions.  The articles in the professional genre link the use of modern medicine and technological interventions including using Pitocin to induce labor to a high risk of cesarean sections and other complications.  Childbirth should be a natural process and although uncontrollable does not require as much intervention as currently performed.

Although using Pitocin during labor induction can be successful in delivering a healthy baby, it is not always necessary to induce labor as the risks can outweigh the benefits in many cases.  Modern medicine and technology has taken a hold of a process that, from the beginning of the human race, has been a natural, uncontrolled process.  In the eyes of many professionals using medicine to induce labor and performing c-sections has become more of a liability issue rather than a medically necessary event.  Doctors are now more worried about being sued and if they can document that they performed all interventions available then they cannot be held accountable for the risks that come with childbirth. 

The article obtained from Wikipedia and eHow are targeted toward an audience that would like to know more about pitocin and labor induction but probably have no medical background as seen in the use of common, simple language to describe the process.  The audience may want to know a brief summary of how labor is induced and the risks that go along with the use of pitocin.  This information is targeted toward the general community and possible women that are going to be induced but do not know much about pitocin and the risks and complications that may arise.  eHow makes the labor induction process sound simple enough and is why it is targeted toward a common person that has no current knowledge of labor induction.  The audience may not spend much time reading the popular genre because it is short, simple, and straightforward with now background or insight into childbirth.  Wikipedia merely states facts.  The purpose of the two popular genre articles is to inform the reader.

In the professional genre, the audience is people that have knowledge about labor induction and that may be considering turning against the use of modern medical intervention during childbirth.  The audience is likely to have some working knowledge of the use of pitocin for labor induction and the risks that it carries.  The articles are intended for an audience that are concerned with the rise of inductions and cesarean sections that are being performed today because they basically tear down modern obstetrics and describe the downfall to labor induction and the need to control every aspect of childbirth.  The audience may want to spend more time with the scholarly articles because the authors not only state facts but give examples and describe real life scenarios about doctors that intervene for no urgent medical reason.  The purpose of the information is to inform and persuade readers about the dangers of labor induction because of high risk for complications to the fetus, the increasing need for c-sections, the painful labor it causes for a woman, and consequently, the need for pain medication. 

“Labor induction” from Wikipedia does not do well establishing the credibility of the information it discusses because there is even a disclaimer at the beginning of the article that states “This article may contain inappropriate or misinterpreted citations that do not verify the text” (Labor induction, Wikipedia).  If that does not denounce that article’s credibility, I do not know what does!  Although there are references to back up the information, the disclaimer may make the audience wonder if the information is accurate and reliable.  The article from eHow about the labor induction process does not cite references nor is there any proof to back up the discussion.  It appears as if the author is a non- health care professional by the style of writing which reduces the credibility of the information.  This article could also be persuasive along with informative because it could persuade the reader that labor induction is a quick and easy process. False!  Overall, the popular genre articles are not effective in establishing credibility. 

The popular genre uses simple language that can relate to the common person reading the article.  eHow lightens the labor induction process so that someone who is reading it may lower their anxiety about being induced because the author, O’Neill makes it sound so simple and painless.  It evokes elated emotions about having a baby because it does not describe the pain and the longevity of labor with pitocin and the risks associated with it.  Its simplicity reduces fear and anxiety about labor induction which is not very realistic.  The Wikipedia article relates facts about pitocin and labor induction moreso than the article from eHow by stating many relevant facts about the makeup of the drug pitocin, how it is administered, risks such as uterine hyperstimulation, tachysystole (fast contractions), and increased risk for pain medication and c-section.  There are numerous references, but again, the disclaimer at the beginning of the article may encourage the reader to be wary of the information contained in the article, therefore making it inappropriate for research.  The popular genre is, again, not very credible and therefore not appropriate. 

The articles in the professional genre establish the information’s credibility by citing different studies that have been completed on the use of pitocin and give the reader statistics on the rates of induction, outcomes, the doubled risk of c-section, the number of babies harmed by pitocin, and so on.   The professional articles relay to the reader true stories and actual quotes from obstetricians about why they really induce and the reasons are atrocious! Along with inducing, many doctors perform c-sections for liability reasons because they want to say that they tried everything they could.  The professional articles do effectively establish credibility because they are bases one evidence-based research and include insights into the real world of childbirth and not just list facts that cannot be backed up.  The authors evoke emotions of anger, misbelieve, and awe to readers about what really takes place behind closed doors in the medical world.  There is, in many cases, no medical necessity to induce labor or to intervene in childbirth.  When doctors actually admit to this it is shocking and this is why the reader’s emotions may be evoked more so with this genre than with the popular genre.  The articles in the professional genre use scientific evidence to back up the argument by correlating the rise of induction with a rise of fetal distress, uterine hyperstimulation, uterine rupture, and cesarean sections have doubled!  This is appropriate because it is hard evidence that can back up the argument the labor induction may not be the best solution and it is still possible to give birth to a healthy baby without so much medical intervention.  Women have been doing it for centuries.

The information from Wikipedia and eHow is shaped by the popular genre because it is simple and straightforward and does not go into much detail about labor induction.  There is limited space because these are web pages not designed solely for this information and the resources do not allow for much evidence based information.  Also the information targets a general audience, therefore using technical terms may confuse the readers and would need to be explained further, but again, space is limited unlike in a professional journal that is dedicated to specific studies and is written by authors that collaborate with professionals with other fields to produce evidence based research.  Professional genres are intended to incorporate facts, research, and studies that back up the argument.  Popular genres merely give a simple summary of current views on topics.  Because labor induction is geared toward such a specific discipline, it requires more than just facts with no credibility.  In order to provide concise and accurate information, the genre must go into detail and have supporting evidence of what is being presented.  The professional articles delve more deeply into the roots of childbirth and labor and the progression over time to the use of modern interventions and the dangers they pose to the future of childbirth.  The language of the articles in the popular genre is informal.  The professional genres incorporate formal language and technical terms and pull evidence from several resources.  Medical terminology is used throughout the professional articles more so than the popular genre. The language of the popular genre is simple and geared toward a common person that may have no medical background.  This is so they can target anyone. 

In conclusion, the most significant difference between the two genres is the use of research and evidence to back up the argument and the claims of each article.  The popular genre has no credibility and although easy to read, not reliable.  The two genres barely overlap in stating some of the risks of pitocin and labor induction.  Both genres are effective at communicating the information to the audience however the audience is completely different for the two.  The popular genre is problematic in conveying the message to a professional audience, whereas if would be difficult for the professional genre to inform the general population with no knowledge labor induction. 

Works Cited

Blustain, S. (2007). Review: modern childbirth: failure to progress. The Women's Review of Books, 24(4), 3-5. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.proxy.libraries.uc.edu/stable/20476610?&Search=yes&searchText=labor&searchText=pitocin&list=hide&searchUri=/action/doAdvancedResultsla=&wc=on&acc=on&gw=jtx&q0=pitocin&f0=all&q1=labor&f1=all&c1=AND&sd=&ed=&jo=&si=1&jtxsi=1&jcpsi=1&artsi=1&so=new&hp=25&Go.x=19&Go.y=20&prevSearch=&item=4&ttl=88&returnArticleService=showFullText

           Labor induction. (2011, September 21). Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/labor_induction

O'Neill, L. (2011). How to prepare for labor induction. Retrieved from eHow.com/how_5671736_prepare_labor_induction.htm

Wendland, C. (2007). The vanishing mother: cesarean section and evidence-based obstetrics. Medical Anthropology Quarterly, 21(2), 218-233. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.proxy.libraries.uc.edu/stable/4499722?&Search=yes&searchText=labor&searchText=oxytocin&list=hide&searchUri=/action/doBasicResults?hp=25&la=&so=new&wc=on&acc=on&gw=jtx&jcpsi=1&artsi=1&Query=oxytocin+and+labor&sbq=oxytocin+and+labor&prq=oxytocin+AND+labor&si=26&jtxsi=26&prevSearch=&item=26&ttl=462&returnArticleService=showFullText