Protest, Collaboration, and Creation of Alternative Models

Women’s Health Activists Using the Internet
  • Alice LoCicero
Part of the The Springer Series in Adult Development and Aging book series (SSAD)


Many women reject the disease model of health and illness. The popular model they reject proffers biochemical, genetic, and proteomic1 internal processes as the core, and often the sole, etiological factors causing states of health2 or illness. Women who are dissatisfied with the disease model and who voice objections to the model, and to the service provisions that follow from its assumptions,3 include a substantial minority of recipients, and former recipients, of mainstream services; researchers; providers of alternative services; and mainstream providers who include a nonconventional approach in their practices. Well considered attention to the essential and shared concerns of women who reject the disease model may be a necessary step in the development of complete, effective approaches to enhancement of health and prevention and treatment of illness.


Service Provision Disease Model Postpartum Depression Home Birth Puerperal Fever 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Belenky, M. F., Clinchy, B. M., Goldberger, N. R., & Tarule, J. M. (1986). Women’s ways of knowing. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  2. Berland, G. K., et al. (2001). Health information on the internet. Journal of the American Medical Association, 205(20), 2612–2621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. The Boston Women’s Health Book Collective (Ed.) (1998). Our bodies, ourselves for the new century. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  4. Brown, G. W., & Harris, T. (1978). Social origins of depression. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  5. Chamberlin, J. (1978). On our own. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  6. Chamberlin, J. (1995). Struggling to be born. In J. Grobe (Ed.), Beyond Bedlam (pp. 59–64). Chicago: Third Side Press.Google Scholar
  7. Cochrane Collaborative Consumer Network (2001). Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (DARE). The University of York NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Available: Google Scholar
  8. Cohen, A., & Kleinman, A. (1996). Untold casualties. Harvard International Review, 18(4), 12–17.Google Scholar
  9. Cohen, N. W. (1991). Open season. Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.Google Scholar
  10. Davis-Floyd, R. E. (1992). Birth as an American rite of passage. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  11. DeMott, R. K. (2000). Commentary: A blatant misuse of power? Birth, 27(4).Google Scholar
  12. Dundas, D. W. (1995). The shocking truth. In J. Grove (Ed.), Beyond Bedlam (pp. 33–36). Chicago, IL: Third Side Press.Google Scholar
  13. Durand, M. (1992). The safety of home birth: The farm study. American Journal of Public Health, 82(3), 450–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Enkin, M., Keirse, M. J. N. C., Renfrew, M., & Neilson, J. (1995). A guide to effective care in pregnancy and childbirth, 2nd edit. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Fausto-Sterling, A. (1992). Myths of gender: Biological theories about women and men. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  16. Fernandez, R. J. (1992). Recent clinical management experience. In J. A. Hamilton & P. N. Harberger (Eds.), Postpartum Psychiatric Illness: A Picture Puzzle (pp. 78–89). Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
  17. Fox, S., et al. (2000). The online health care revolution: How the Web helps Americans take better care of themselves. Washington, DC: Per Charitable Trust.Google Scholar
  18. Frado, L. (2000, January 2, 1000). Point of view: What I know about craziness. Toronto Star. Jan. 2, 2000.
  19. Gabbe, S. G., & Holzman, G. B. (2001). Obstetricians’ choice of delivery. The Lancet, 357, 722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gaskin, I. M. (1997). Ina May Gaskin. In P. Chester (Ed.), Sisters on a journey (pp. 125–134). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Goer, H. (1995). Obstetric myths versus research realities. Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.Google Scholar
  22. Gotlein, J. (1995). Bearing witness. In J. Grobe (Ed.), Beyond Bedlam (pp. 111–122). Chicago, Third Side Press.Google Scholar
  23. Griebenow, J. (2000). Jenny’s tale—saga of a birth gone wrong. Available: Scholar
  24. Grobe, J. (1995a). Beyond Bedlam: Contemporary women psychiatric survivors speak out. Chicago: Third Side Press.Google Scholar
  25. Grobe, J. (1995b). Hospital records. In J. Gobe (Ed.), Beyond Bedlam (pp. 65–72). Chicago: Third Side Press.Google Scholar
  26. Herman, J. (1997). Trauma and recovery. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  27. ICAN (2000–2001). International Cesarean awareness network. Available: Scholar
  28. Jordan, B. (1997). Authoritative knowledge and its construction. In R. E. Davis-Floyd & C. F. Sargent (Eds.), Childbirth and authoritative knowledge: Cross-cultural perspectives (pp. 55-79). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  29. Jordan, J. (2000). A model of connection for a disconnected world. In J. J. Shaw & J. Whellis (Eds.), Odysseys in psychotherapy (pp. 147–165). New York: Ardent Media.Google Scholar
  30. Kanter, R. M. (2001). Evolve! Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  31. Karon, B., & Vandenbos, G. R. (1995). Psychotherapy of schizophrenia: The treatment of choice. New York: Jason Aronson.Google Scholar
  32. Kegan, R. (1994). In over our heads. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Kleinman, A., & Cohen, A. (1997). Psychiatry’s global challenge. Scientific American, 276(3), 86–89.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kuhn, T. S. (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  35. Lauer-Williams, J. (2001). Postpartum depression: A phenomenological exploration of the woman’s experience. Massachusetts School of Professional Psychology, Boston, MA.Google Scholar
  36. Lazarus, E. S. (1988). Theoretical considerations for the study of the doctor-patient relationship: Implications of a perinatal study. Medical Anthropology Quarterly, 2(1), 35-60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lerner, B. (2001). Breast cancer wars. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Lewis, J. A., & Bernstein, J. (1996). Women’s health: A relational perspective across the life cycle. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett.Google Scholar
  39. Lewontin, R. C. (2000). The triple helix: Gene, organism, and environment. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Lind, M. R. (1999). The gender impact of temporary virtual work groups. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 42(A), 276-285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lind, M. (2001). An exploration of communication channel usage by gender. Work Study, 50(6), 234-240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. LLLI (2001). La Leche League International. Available: Scholar
  43. LoCicero, A. (2001). Women’s health and the world wide web. Paper presented at the New England Sociology Association Meeting, April 28, 2001, Fairfield, CT.Google Scholar
  44. LoCicero, A. K. (1993). Explaining excessive rates of Cesareans and other childbirth interventions: Contributions from contemporary theories of gender and psychosocial development. Social Science and Medicine, 37(10), 1261-1269.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Loweenstein, G. F., Weber, E. U., Hsee, C. K., & Welch, N. (2001). Risk as feelings. Psychological Bulletin, 127(2), 267-286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. MANA (2001). Midwives Alliance of North America. Available: Scholar
  47. McInnes, S. C. (2000). I am you. Available: Scholar
  48. McKenna, K. Y. A., & Bargh, J. A. (1998). Coming out in the age of the Internet: Identity “demargnialization” through virtual group participation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(3), 681-694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Members, L. S. (1999). End violence list serv [List Serve]. Reviewed in UNIFEM (1999) Women @ work against violence: Voices in cyberspace. New York: United Nations Development Fund for Women.Google Scholar
  50. Miller, J. B., & Stiver, I. P. (1997). The healing connection. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  51. National Association for Rights Protection and Advocacy (2000) Judi Chamberlin. National Association for Rights Protection and Advocacy-. Available: chamberlin.htm.Google Scholar
  52. National Center for Health Statistics (2001). Fasts Stats A to Z. Available: Scholar
  53. National Women’s Law Center, FOCUS, Lewin Group. (2000). Making the grade on women’s health: Executive summary (Executive Summary). Washington, DC: National Women’s Law Center, FOCUS, The Lewin Group.Google Scholar
  54. Nechas, E., & Foley, D. (1994). Unequal treatment. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  55. Oakley, A. (1986). The captured womb. New York: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  56. Office of Women’s Health, Food and Drug Administration (1999). Women’s health: Take time to care. US Food and Drug Administration. Available: Scholar
  57. Penfield Chester, E. (1997). Sisters on a journey. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  58. Perry, W. G. (1970). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.Google Scholar
  59. Rodwin, M. A. (2001). The politics of evidence-based medicine. Journal of Health Politics, Policy, and Law, 26(2), 439–446.Google Scholar
  60. Rooks, J. P., Weatherby, N. L., Ernst, E. K. M., Stapleton, S., Rosen, D., & Rosenfield, A. (1989). Outcomes of care in birth centers: The National Birth Center Study. New England Journal of Medicine, 321(26), 1804–1811.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Ross, C. A., & Pam, A. (1995). Pseudoscience in biological psychiatry. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  62. Schulman, R. (2001). Volunteers in psychotherapy, Colloquium presented at Suffolk University, Boston, MA, Feb. 7, 2001.Google Scholar
  63. Scot, R. (1972). The discovery of Witchcraft. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
  64. Services, Learning and Information Services (2001). Evidence-based medicine.Available: Google Scholar
  65. Shimrat, I. (1997). Call me crazy: Stories from the mad movement. Vancouver, BC: Press Gang.Google Scholar
  66. Szasz, T. (1994). Cruel compassion. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.Google Scholar
  67. Tew, M. (1993). Do obstetric interventions make birth safer? British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 93(7), 659–674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. UNIFEM (1999). Women at work to end violence. New York: United Nations Development Fund for Women.Google Scholar
  69. Unruly Women (2000). Unruly Women List. Available at Google Scholar
  70. Unzicker, R. E. (1995). From the inside. In J. Grobe (Ed.), Beyond Bedlam (pp. 13–18). Chicago, IL: Third Side Press.Google Scholar
  71. Ussher, J. (1991). Women’s madness: Misogyny or mental illness. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Press.Google Scholar
  72. Venter, C. (2001). Genome research (Weekend Edition). NPR Online. Available: cf/cmn/cmnpd01fm.cfm?PrgDate=02%2F11%2F2001&PrgID=10.Google Scholar
  73. Venter, C., et al. (2001). The sequence of the human genome. Science, 291(5507), 1153–1158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Wagner, M. (2000). Technology in birth: First do no harm. Midwifery Today. Available: Scholar
  75. Walters, D. C. & Quillinan, E. (1999). Just take it out. Mt. Vernon, IL: Topiary.Google Scholar
  76. Wertz, R. W., & Wertz, D. C. (1977). Lying-in: A history of childbirth in America. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  77. Wittig, M. A., & Schmitz, J. (1996). Electronic grassroots organizing. Journal of Social Issues, 52(1), 53-70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Woods, A. (2000–2001). The birth of my first 3 children[sic]. International Caesarian Awareness Network. Google Scholar
  79. Women’s Institute for Childbearing Policy (1994). Childbearing policy within a national health program: An evolving consensus for new directions. Boston, MA: Women’s Institute for Childbearing Policy.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alice LoCicero
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologySuffolk UniversityBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations