And there are those in my camp who think that unity is the answer. "If we could just unify....if we could all come together." "If... if.... if...." I love them, and I understand what they are wishing for.....but I think longing for unity is pretty much a waste of time. That being said, this is attempt #1,001 to explain my take on the complexities of unity.
UNITY & DIVERSITY, DIVISION & IDENTIFICATION
I wrote an article on unity and diversity for my students a long time ago.
I pointed out in that original article that diversity is a great thing. In context, our relationship to that word is actually one of the two major impediments to unity among midwives. First, we serve a diverse group of women. Accommodating diversity is what we do.
At the time that I wrote that original article, the majority of midwives recognized the value of serving autonomously. Most acknowledged the conundrum of attempting to unify such a diverse group who serve such a diverse population.
They understood that a bit of caution might be warranted concerning the pursuit of unity. Unity might come at the high cost of wholesale homogenization of a service that really should be personalized to meet the needs of the individual client.
Unity was a passion for some, but I don't remember "unity" being used as a pointy finger to disparage anyone who has a dissenting opinion, as it is today.
My original article proposed the more loosely articulated goal of being unified in our desire to serve autonomously. Autonomous practice is the only way to honor the diversity of our clientele. Serving families in their own unique situations, with their own individual needs, is actually a benchmark of midwifery, isn't it?
The second impediment is that, in reality, unity of any large group, is pretty much impossible. No matter how much we might long for the Kumbaya idea of unity for midwifery, in real life, unity is pretty rare. Here's why: unity requires that all who were previously in disagreement, acquiesce to only one desire. It is the changing of our desires that is the hold up. That is what prevents us from glomming onto a singular philosophy or goal for any period of time. It is DESIRE that determines where we stand. I will explain that in a minute.
Before we argue for unity, maybe we should give some thought to how we define it. Is it "all for one and one for all?" I don't think so. The cry for unity is usually code for "Shut up and come over to our side." or "Stop disagreeing with me." .... or "Don't make me come up with an argument. I am comfortable here in my little bubble." It is rarely a meeting in the middle. When it comes to parents' rights, I am not sure that it is possible to define "middle," and frankly, we don't have time to look for it. Parents' rights are diminishing as we speak, and those who are demanding that I work for unity, are responsible for a large part of that tragedy.
And you have probably noticed that those who are telling me to UNIFY are NOT volunteering to do so with me, rather, the instruction is for me to unify with them and to stop causing trouble.
Believe it or not, I don't intentionally cause trouble, but it seems to be a by-product of telling the truth* and encouraging others to do the same. Admittedly, I am pretty vocal in my challenge for people to do the research and then take a stand. I won't deny that. But, I really find it incredulous that I would have to point out that I did not create any division. Division was here long before I was. In fact there is division within the divisions. But hasn't there always been? And actually, I want to propose that division is a GOOD thing when it means that I step away from what I don't like and stand for what I DO like. Right?
And I am not just talking about midwifery; division is part of the human condition.
Divisions are inevitable because:
WE SORT OURSELVES INTO GROUPS BASED ON WHAT WE WANT!
For most of my life, I had it out of order: I thought that I wanted something different because I believe something different. Now I am convinced that beliefs are more likely to be predicated on wants, rather than the other way around. I WANT something different for parents, AND for midwifery, than the majority does, apparently. Since I want something different, my beliefs are born from my wants. Therefore, my rhetoric and my actions and my alignments are all determined by what I want. Identification and alignment with those who want what I want is logical. So, it is only common sense that I would distance myself from any group that wants something I don't want. I will not be investing my time or resources into support of any organization that doesn't want what I want. In that context, division is necessary, isn't it?
WE SORT OURSELVES INTO GROUPS BASED ON WHAT WE WANT AND WE SORT OURSELVES INTO GROUPS BASED ON WHO WE WANT IT FOR!
The group with whom we choose to identify will be determined by not only WHAT we want, but by WHO we want it for. For me, it is absolutely, positively, unequivocably about WHO is served: the mamma, the baby, the family. I want mothers to know the truth* about birth, and for them to be served by people who know the truth* about birth.
I want:
• parents to own birth and I don't want their choices to be made for them. I don't want ACOG, ACNM, AMA, MEAC, NARM, MANA, The Big Push, or any other group making decisions on their behalf or creating laws that disenfranchise them.
• every individual woman to make her own birthing DECISIONS (not assumptions) based on TRUTH (not lies, gossip or birthfright.)
• widespread acknowledgment of the sovereignty of parents to decide where and with whom they birth.
• every woman to be able to make all the decisions about her birth and her baby without having to stomp her foot or raise her fist, demanding the right to do so. No woman should have to fight to experience the biological function of birth where and with whom SHE chooses.
I am very clear about what I want, so why on earth would I relinquish what I want for the sake of unity?
Unity is NOT my end goal, and frankly never has been. My goal is to tell the truth* to as many people as I can, for as long as I can......and then hope that my efforts, and those of people who want what I want, effect something positive for birthing families.
So I am back where I started with this: In order for authentic midwifery to survive, the desire for unity must be trumped by the desire to serve individual women, autonomously.
Unity for the sake of unity could be, actually probably always is, counterproductive. What will be lost for our grandchildren if unity is seen as paramount to the rights of individual midwives to serve individual parents?
And ultimately, I want to encourage every person reading this to consider carefully who you stand with, what you stand for, and who you stand for. Don't be afraid to be identified with a principle, or a purpose or a cause. If you can't stand with a group on principle, work toward the purpose or support the cause, join a different group. If you feel like sneaking out the back door when standing with your group is not popular, then you should find another group to stand with.....a group who wants the same things you want, for the same people you want it for. There is real
integrity in that.
* The truth about birth is that it is a normal function of biology. Pregnancy is not an illness, birth is not an emergency, and laboring mothers are not patients. Birth is safer when left alone. Childbirth is not the domain of medicine, or midwifery. It belongs to the woman giving birth.
There is a line in the sand. I didn't create it, but as soon as I saw it, I chose a side and stood there, and now I stand and stand and stand. Admittedly, "my side" is the minority. There are not so many of us, but I can pretty safely assert here that we are not about to stop wanting what we want for parents and babies, in exchange for what the majority of midwives want for themselves.
Carla Hartley is a friend, a midwife, a defender of mammas and birth...she is also the owners of Ancient Art Midwifery Institute and the founder of Trust Birth.
Click to Print This Page
