Shelton D C
J Obstet Gynaecol. 2012 Nov;32(8):718-23. doi: 10.3109/01443615.2012.721031.
This paper seeks to determine whether the man-midwives William Smellie and William Hunter deserve continuing approbation as 'Founding Fathers' of the obstetrics profession. Scrutiny of their careers reveals their involvement in murders for dissection. In addition, the man-midwifery initiative of delivery in lying-in hospitals resulted in around 1 million more deaths in Britain and Ireland between 1730 and 1930, than would have occurred had home-births remained as the norm. While some may still credit Smellie and Hunter with obstetric discoveries, their knowledge was obtained by murder-for-dissection. That indictment, together with the lying-in hospital legacy, far outweighs their discoveries. The paper invites further constructive discussion and debate, but concludes the accolade of Founding Fathers is undeserved. Any continuing endorsement of Smellie and Hunter effectively demeans the high ethical standards and reputation of current obstetric professionals.
本文旨在确定男助产士威廉·斯梅利和威廉·亨特是否理应继续被赞誉为产科专业的“奠基人”。对他们职业生涯的审视揭示了他们参与谋杀以供解剖的行为。此外,产科医院分娩的男助产士倡议导致1730年至1930年间,英国和爱尔兰的死亡人数比以家庭分娩为常态时多出约100万。虽然有些人可能仍将产科发现归功于斯梅利和亨特,但他们的知识是通过谋杀以供解剖获得的。这一指控,连同产科医院遗留的问题,远远超过了他们的发现。本文呼吁进行进一步建设性的讨论和辩论,但得出的结论是,给予他们“奠基人”的赞誉是不应得的。对斯梅利和亨特的任何持续认可实际上都有损当前产科专业人员的高道德标准和声誉。