A Treatise on the Art of Midwifery: Setting Forth Various Abuses Therein, Especially as to the Practice With Instruments: the Whole Serving to Put All Rational Inquirers in a Fair Way of Very Safely Forming Their Own Judgement Upon the Question; Which It Is Best to Employ, in Cases of Pregnancy and Lying-in, a Man-midwife; Or, a MidwifeNihell, Elizabeth
History
A Treatise on the Art of Midwifery: Setting Forth Various Abuses Therein, Especially as to the Practice With Instruments: the Whole Serving to Put All Rational Inquirers in a Fair Way of Very Safely Forming Their Own Judgement Upon the Question; Which It Is Best to Employ, in Cases of Pregnancy and Lying-in, a Man-midwife; Or, a Midwife
Nihell, Elizabeth
Midwifery -- Early works to 1800; Obstetrics -- Early works to 1800
THE same Mr. Rathlaw, in the same piece, exclaiming against the use of
the crotchets has this remark.
“NO one (says he) can be ignorant of it’s being no longer the practice
in France, or in England, to employ crotchets, or murderous tire-têtes
(_would this were truth!_) in the deliveries, unless for a monstrous or
hydrocephalous head, when the bulk of it is so enormous, that there is
no possibility of getting it out whole, and especially if the child
should be dead.... In my time, (adds this author) every eminent
man-midwife had invented different means of extricating himself out of
the plunge of such a case, and their reputation grew in proportion to
their respective success. Yet, hitherto, I do not know, that either at
Paris or at London, they have got such a length, as to take any
particular instrument under their protection. Nine years ago, (Mr.
Rathlaw continues) I had made a forceps almost wholly of my own
invention to extract the fœtus by the head, and it often succeeded well
with me. It was, as to its make, a good deal resembling that which
Butter describes in the Edinburgh-acts, volume III. art. 20. But mine
(proceeds he) seem to possess better proportions, and is certainly of a
more handy use, than those which have hitherto appeared.”
PLEASE to observe, that this forceps of Mr. Rathlaw is the same as
Palfin’s, or rather as that of Gilles le Doux, excepting only the
semilunar hollow cuts in the claws, which Monsieur Duffé, a surgeon of
Paris, had contrived in them. The author says, it had _often_ succeeded
well with him: he does not say _always_, and why? most probably because,
when he did so _often_ find it of service, that was, only whenever there
was no sort of occasion for using it at all. Do not let it here be
imagined, that I force an inference. I give my reason. Supposing that
such an instrument was necessary to every practitioner, the case for his
using it cannot but rarely occur. Now those rare cases where Rathlaw
judged his forceps necessary, and in which it failed him, were in all
likelihood the true tests of its merit: whereas those other cases, in
which he _often_ succeeded, may very well be taken for such as, with
hands and patience, might have afforded a better account of them, than
the silly superfluous quackery of employing a forceps, unless indeed his
hands were too clumsy to attempt it. Otherwise the using instruments,
where they sometimes do the work with so much more pain and danger, when
the bare hands well conducted would do so much better, remind me
naturally enough of what I have seen a pretty master do with a
steel-instrument called a zig-zag or fruit-tongs, when, to display it,
or out of wantonness, he has catched up fruit with it, that lay fully
within the reach of his hand. In this piece of childishness there is
however no mischief; whereas the man-midwife, for considerations of
lucre, dallies with two lives to pluck at a fruit that is never, I
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account