Talk:Doula

Why is ALICE still listed on this page? I have removed it before only to have it put back. I understand that for a long time they provided Doula training however looking at the reference^[1] and also over http://www.alace.org in general I see no mention that they provide doula trainings any more. It does mention "Childbirth Educator Training and Certification Program" which is not a doula training. I will wait a while before making the required edit so others can way in on this.Drumzandspace2000 (talk) 12:14, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

See . WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 13:02, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

It says nothing on that page about offering Doula trainings. It says "the ALACE Childbirth Educator Training and Certification Program" The only mention of Doulas on that page is not about trainings or classes. I have removed it again from the page if someone has a reference to show that Alice is still around and still doing Doula trainings please chime in Drumzandspace2000 (talk) 09:29, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

The also only provide childbirth education not doula training. As above I will make the edit to remove this unless someone knows otherwise. Drumzandspace2000 (talk) 12:53, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Oops, you are correct. I had thought Ballen verified it but Lamaze was only mentioned in a table discussing labour support. My bad. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 13:11, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

The info on doulas training in NA is just wrong. You have to do your research. The process to be cert is about 2-3 years and include clinical hours, seminars, extensive reading and a final exam, which take about 2-3 hours to complete. I find the over all wiki description of doulas to be so negative. Doulas do not pressure women as whole, I am sure there are some bad doulas other there just as there are bad doctors, to state that doulas as a whole disregard safety to achieve their own objectives by pressuring women is just false. I would happy to take part in writing this. I have sent this site around to several organizations and doula networks in NA.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.250.196.150 (talk) 04:07, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Articles are written based on reliable sources, not personal experience. The criticisms of doulas is based on an aritcle in the Wall Street Journal, which is adequate in my opinion. Removing sourced information you personally dislike or find critical is inappropriate. You have to distinguish between the lead section of an article and the body; if it appears the lead section duplicates what is found below, this is actually proper since it is meant to summarize the important points from the rest of the article. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 10:53, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Also in the wsf article it says:

"For hours, Dr. Coleman says, she asked her patient to take the drug Pitocin, commonly used to help labor progress. Each time, the patient would send the doctor out of the room and confer with her birth doula. "I was spending hours trying to explain that this was for the baby's health, and it was just 'no, no, no,' " recalls Dr. Coleman, head of obstetrics and gynecology for the Palo Alto clinic of the Palo Alto Medical Foundation, one of Silicon Valley's largest medical groups. "I felt so powerless."

I reckon since the doctor was not in the room he did not witness the conversation and is placing the blame on the doula. Any good journalist would know this is just speculation and opinion, not fact. We have no idea if the doula went into the bathroom to give the mom and dad a moment to talk about what "THEY" wanted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.101.36.68 (talk) 16:12, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Again - the training is wrong. I have given you two website dona.org and icea.org that will verify the training. The article in the WSJ is also just someones opinion and as you state opinions do not make them facts. I wish you would be more open minded about how you choose to define the work doulas do and do not do. The WSJ article is almost is 10 years old. A lot changes in 10 years. You need to update your facts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.101.36.68 (talk) 15:36, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

NY Times

Boston Globe

This is taken from ACOG

Type of companion important

The researchers also evaluated the type of person providing care to the patient. Women who were cared for by an outside person, such as friend, family member, or doula, had more positive effects from continuous labor care than did women who had care from a hospital staff member. “The organization of care in modern maternity units, including shift changes, diverse staff responsibilities, and staff shortages, appears to limit the effectiveness of labor support provided by members of the hospital staff,” says Ellen D. Hodnett, RN, PhD, lead author of the review, in a news release. “Non-hospital caregivers may be able

to give greater attention to the mothers’ needs.”

info

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Rae Davies, Executive Director Phone: 1- 888-282-CIMS, E-mail: cimshome@bellsouth.net, Fax: 904-285-2120

CIMS Responds to Wall Street Journal Article on Birth Doulas

The Coalition for Improving Maternity Services (CIMS) applauds the Wall Street Journal for publicizing on their front page (January 19, 2004) the newest healthcare group assisting birthing women-doulas. CIMS is somewhat discouraged that anecdotes of doctors were used to criticize doulas. In fact the article stated, “In most cases, birth doulas are helpful to laboring women, many doctors say.”

Evidence-based care is the gold standard of healthcare. “The best available studies which included nearly 13,000 women,” states Rae Davies, CIMS Executive Director, “found that continuous one-to- one labor support provided by trained doulas reduces the use of routine medical interventions and subsequently the short and long-term health risks associated with them. Women who have continuous labor support provided specifically by non-hospital affiliated trained doulas benefited the most. They were 26% less likely to need a cesarean, 41% less likely to need a forceps or vacuum assisted birth and 28% less likely to use analgesia or anesthesia. “

“We know from a recent US national survey of women’s childbearing experiences conducted by the Maternity Center Association of New York,” added Deborah Woolley, CNM, Ph.D., Co-Chair for CIMS, “that women who had doula care were highly satisfied. In fact, the authors who reviewed the recent studies for the internationally respected Cochrane Collaboration concluded that continuous labor support should be the norm, rather than the exception. ”

Today, many pregnant women are well read and informed about their right to “informed refusal”, a right acknowledged by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Informed refusal gives a woman the right to determine for herself whether or not to agree to or submit to a suggested procedure after she has evaluated the procedure's risks and benefits. As indicated in the article, when women chose to refuse a certain procedure, that refusal can be wrongly attributed to the doula, likely because the medical personnel may not be used to a patient questioning their recommendations. The recently released National Healthcare Quality Report by the Department of Health and Human Services calls for the establishment of high quality, preventive, evidence-based and cost-effective care for all Americans. Providing childbearing women with the continuous supportive care of a trained birth doula does all that and more. The Coalition for Improving Maternity Services endorses the use of continuous emotional and physical support for laboring women, including doulas who are trained to assist laboring women.

The Coalition for Improving Maternity Services (CIMS), a United Nations recognized NGO, is a collaborative effort of numerous individuals, leading researchers, and more than 50 organizations representing over 90,000 members. Promoting a wellness model of maternity care that will improve birth outcomes and substantially reduce costs, CIMS developed the Mother-Friendly Childbirth Initiative in 1996. A consensus document that has been recognized as an important model for improving the healthcare and well being of children beginning at birth, the Mother-Friendly Childbirth Initiative has been translated into several languages and is gaining support around the world. For more information contact CIMS at 1-888-282-CIMS or visit www.motherfriendly.org

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.101.36.68 (talk) 16:06, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Please provide reliable sources for changes, and please do not simply remove information you personally disagree with. The sourcing of the page can certainly be improved, please feel free to add sources. Removing them is inappropriate. Also, please be aware of our policy on copyright violations; if the above represent large direct quotations, it may not be a good idea to post it. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 18:28, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

I provided several sources yesterday, three on the education alone and yet you keep changing this. I am not removing things that I don't agree with rather removing false information. You state doulas pressure parents, which is not true, that is someones opinion and not a fact. Have there been patients who have felt pressured, I am sure, just as they have felt pressure from doctors, but on a whole this is not the job of doulas. I have provided several site to nationally recognized doula organizations that list the scope of work, the code of ethics as well as the training, what more do you all want. i even contacted wiki directly to offer help with what you currently have. why does this have to be so hard. what you all write is slanderous and mostly you have your info wrong. Articles you site are over 10 years old. Are there bad encounters, of course, any human interaction is going to have someone who had a bad experience but your choice of words to describe issues is really unfair and creates a negative impression to for a reader who this may be their only encounter with the definition of doulas. I am not asking to remove all negative info, however I am asking that you are mindful of your choice of words. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.108.101.100 (talk) 14:39, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Where were your sources? You removed text, you added no citations with the text you wrote in. Wikipedia is about verifiability, not truth, so saying information is "false" is irrelevant unless you can prove it with a citation. It may not represent your experience, but your experience is irrelevant.

It's not hard if you provide reliable sources and accept that well-sourced information you disagree with must remain in the article. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 00:47, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

hello.

i have not edited pages before, or posted in here, so i apologize if i break some sort of protocol. i did not edit the article for this very reason, and instead opted to post in here.

source #1 for the article (Balas, M. C.; Gale, M.; Kagan, S. H. (2004). "Delirium doulas: An innovative approach to enhance care for critically ill older adults". Critical care nurse 24 (4): 36–46. PMID 15341233. edit), which is referenced 11 times is simply NOT about doulas in the way that this article is structured. this article presents doulas as lay-people that assist in pregnancy, labor and post-pardum scenarios: all true. the source is NOT about this role.

the source article is about lay-people assisting with dementia patients: ONLY. it never mentions children, or child-birth.

using the article as a source is find under the "other uses" of doulas heading...but to reference the article FIRST, and ELEVEN times (that means TEN times for things that the source does NOT support) is awful.

this really needs to be fixed.

nicholas

I agree and have informed the Nursing and Medicine WikiProjects. Thincat (talk) 20:40, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

The article was used to support the pronunciation and it also contains the following line "A doula (doó la) is traditionally described as a layperson who offers physical, emotional, and informational support to women in labor and the women’s partners." so it supports the definition at least. Other examples of content in the article do appear to be supported by this reference, as it contains towards the end a section called "Use of Doulas in the Obstetric Setting" which is a few paragraphs long. I assume most of the references came from here rather than the parts of the article on delirium and ICU etc. Lesion (talk) 21:55, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

This article needs to make up its mind about whether a doula is a midwife or not. These sentences suggest that a doula is a midwife:

″A doula is a nonmedical person who assists a woman before, during, and/or after childbirth, as well as her spouse and/or family, by providing physical assistance, and emotional support.″

″This may be due to doulas providing intermittent assistance being experienced midwives who focused less on social support and more on medical aspects of delivery.″

However, this sentence suggests that she isn't:

″Continuous support during labour provided by doulas (along with variety of groups such as nurses, midwives, other hospital staff, partners, family or friends) have been associated with improved outcomes for both mothers and children.″

So, which is it?

74.71.71.165 (talk) 16:20, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Obviously, if there are differences, a doula is not the same as a midwife. Some doulas may have undergone training as a midwife and may have some experience in the profession, but choose to work as a doula (at least that's how I understand it; I'm new to the subject), and the sentence in question doesn't say they're the same (just that there is some overlap in people, but not necessarily roles). There are clearly at least three crucial differences between midwives and doulas: First, the required education, as the profession of doula is not regulated and the title can be used by anyone (as the article points out), second, the fact that midwives (primarily) provide medical services and doulas do not (generally speaking), and third, a doula proves post-birth assistance, which a midwive does not. A doula therefore provides services more like nannies in part. However, midwives, doulas, nannies/maids, night nurses, baby/newborn nurses, babysitters, au-pairs and mother's helpers all provide somewhat different services connected with pregnancy, childbirth, childcare and support for the parents. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 14:45, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

OK, I deleted the second cited sentence ("This may be due to...") since it was poorly worded and seemed to imply that doulas were midwives. 2604:2000:EFC0:2:F4EC:C71F:9AE0:D5FB (talk) 18:32, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Doula. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141207092328/http://doula.org.uk/content/what-doula to http://doula.org.uk/content/what-doula

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:08, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

First day ever of editing. I was making the subtle changes to the language of who gives birth, but was told I'm not making minor changes and may be banned from editing. We know that people who give birth may be trans or not identify as "women," and their partners may not be their "spouse." This is not a dispute on the beliefs of whether that is moral or not. The truth is that doulas support birthing people (not just women birthing, but other people who may birth) and their partner (who may not be their spouse,) should they have them. It is inaccurate to list them all as "women" therefore the changes that I had made. I do hope Wikipedia will strive to the accurate, regardless of the beliefs of individual editors. CCalvano (talk) 03:57, 12 January 2017 (UTC) CCalvano (talk) 03:57, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

"We encourage you to be bold in a fair and accurate manner." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Getting_started?markasread=96949365

I was BOLD, fair, and accurate in my changes.

"Commitment to openness and diversity Though US-based, the organization is international in its nature. Our board of trustees, staff members, and volunteers are involved without discrimination based on their religion, political beliefs, sexual preferences, nationalities, etc... Not only do we accept diversity, but we actually look forward to it."" https://m.wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Values

If Wikipedia is committed to openness and diversity; if it "not only accept[s] diversity, but...actually look forward to it" then you must allow for the edits that include all those who birth, may be pregnant, and may be part of their family. CCalvano (talk) 04:33, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

I'm a birthworker as well and agree with the addition of non-binary language being the most appropriate. I have changed this language where applicable in addition to my other revisions. 9H48F (talk) 03:04, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

I agree that "spouse" needed to be changed to birthing partner or similar but I disagree that woman/mother needs to be changed to person. We have had the same discussion on the article for menstruation over and over and over... For a layperson reading this article, I think we should stick to woman/mother and can explain in one sentence that also transgender people can give birth but we don't have to make the entire article gender neutral. EMsmile (talk) 01:35, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

I copy here from the talk page of menstruation a statement by User:Flyer22 which supports my stance with Wikipedia policy links: +++++++++ I noticed that the language in this article refers to "women" as those who menstruate. This unfortunately leaves out those who are a part of the gender binary who menstruate, such as genderqueer folk, intersex folk and transmen. Keep this in mind and don't leave anybody out! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.156.77.57 (talk) 19:55, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

:Whether you are or aren't the registered editor I reverted, with a WP:Dummy edit summary here, read what is stated at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine/Archive 37#Phimosis article again and gender identity, including gender identity at other articles; two important things that Wikipedia goes by are WP:Verifiability and WP:Due weight. Flyer22 (talk) 20:18, 21 October 2013 (UTC)++++++++++ EMsmile (talk) 01:35, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the resources EMsmile, I'm glad to see non-binary language being discussed and wasn't sure where to look! The difference between these articles and the doula article is that the former references anatomy/conditions whereas the doula article is describing clients. Notably, the doula industry (generally) refers to clients in gender neutral terms and one of the first citations in this article is a source that supports this as well as doula/birth organizations DONA International, Lamaze, ICEA, and DTI. If this article is to describe the role of the doula as it pertains to their clients, it should be using non-binary language and could easily be rewritten using sources with non-binary language (although personally I don't really have the time for that). Non-binary language goes beyond transgender individuals and encompasses gender non-confirming and even individuals identifying as women who don't want to be called "mothers"! 9H48F (talk) 21:08, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

@User:Doc James: could you please inform us what the current thinking is around the use of non-binary language in health related articles in Wikipedia? I have a concern regarding WP:Due weight and to using language that could become off-putting to the layperson who is reading this. It's not meant to be a page that addresses clients of doulas, it's meant to be an encyclopaedic article. Hence, I would hesitate to replace all "woman, female, she, her, mother" words with "birthing person, they, person giving birth" etc. But I'd like to know what the current sentiment is amongst experienced Wikipedians? Also, opinion by User:Flyer22? Maybe a compromise would be to expand on this section to explain terminology further and to mention that some clients do not want to be called "mothers" (with reference): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doula#Full-Spectrum EMsmile (talk) 02:56, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

When one is speaking about the biology of the situation one typically uses "males" and "female". When one is speaking about gender one uses non-binary language. At least that is my understanding. Additionally when referring to a specific person one generally uses the pronoun that they wish. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 08:23, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

User:Doc James hmmmm, this doesn't make it any clearer to me. Does "female" have to be replaced with "birthing person" in this article or not? I would argue "female" is OK here since birth is a physiological process, not a "society or gender" one. Only persons with a uterus can give birth (so far at least), and those are biologically "female". In any case the number of transmen giving birth is bound to be very small globally so I don't think we need to have every sentence gender neutral in this article. I would say it suffices to say that transmen can also give birth (link to transgender article), but then for the rest of the article keep using female, woman, she etc. OK? EMsmile (talk) 09:42, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Yes that is what I would recommend. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:46, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Even if the trans thing is real then 99% of pregnant people would be women anyway. Can people see now why Wikipedia is so often criticised as having a liberal bias? 2001:BB6:7A04:58:1DAC:5DB9:96FE:B012 (talk) 07:42, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

@User:2001:BB6:7A04:58:1DAC:5DB9:96FE:B012, the criticisms of Wikipedia are well-known. In fact, there's a Wikipeida article on this topic and a further detailed one on the ideological bias of Wikipedia! I think it is beneficial to have these conversations on appropriate language use so that Wikipedia can be as comprehensive and easy to use as possible. In this article, you'll see that "woman" is used throughout the text. 9H48F (talk)

Given the Doulas I've personally encountered were anti-abortion (when they expressed an opinion) it surprised me today to discover that Abortion Doulas exist and are being discussed in recent news media. Also, Wikipedia doesn't currently have an article on Abortion Doulas or mention them here.

(UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.227.197.225 (talk)

I think we need a better image for the lead. This one looks too much like a "sick" woman in a hospitalised setting. A doula is helping laboring women to work through the labor pains in a positive emotion. If I had time I'd look myself for a better picture, hopefully there is one in Wikimedia Commons. EMsmile (talk) 15:12, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Replaced the image to be more representative of a doula's work during labor. 9H48F (talk) 19:12, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

I love the new image that you have chosen, 9H48F - thank you! Much better than the one that was there before! EMsmile (talk) 12:52, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

Our group of 4 will be expanding on and adding new information about

1. death doulas
2. perceptions of doulas (society and provider), and
3. health implications for mother and child post-birth. Clphan (talk) 21:13, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

(added numbering formatting) Please make sure the other group members assign themselves to this page before editing. Thanks. Health policy (talk) 03:35, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Peer Review

1. The group's edits substantially improve the article as described in the wikipedia peer review "guiding framework." Huyha63 (talk) 21:12, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
2. The group has achieved its overall goals for improvement. Huyha63 (talk) 21:12, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
3. The draft submission reflects a neutral point of view. The group does not insert opinions of their own and presents neither positive or negative information. Lyjanicee (talk) 21:14, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
4. The points included are verifiable with cited secondary sources that are freely available. Huyha63 (talk) 21:12, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
5. The edits are formatted consistent with Wikipedia's manual of style. Laurafansun (talk) 21:15, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
6. There is no evidence of plagiarism or copyright violation.

Sharonluong (talk) 21:14, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

I have heard that in 2022, doulas will have some form of state-sponsored standard within the Commonwealth of Virginia. Is there a way the article can reflect that on the next rework? 2601:846:C100:2D80:BD81:43F1:5D07:52A9 (talk) 09:55, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment, I added Virginia to the list of states offering Medicaid reimbursement. Potentially, this section could be expanded to add details of the state programs along with section subheaders for each country discussed. 9H48F (talk) 14:54, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

The lead states they are 'trained professionals' but in the next paragaph it sais they may not have any formal training so which one is it? 2A00:23C7:5AD0:8F01:6483:E9A9:EDB:ABD3 (talk) 03:59, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

The article claims that abortion doulas exist in the United Kingdom but havent provided a source. This should be removed as this is very unlikely. 2A00:23C7:5AD0:8F01:6483:E9A9:EDB:ABD3 (talk) 04:02, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 2 October 2023 and 15 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Lbatesro (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Mollyfields, Jbasnet.

— Assignment last updated by Jbasnet (talk) 03:13, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 17 January 2024 and 9 March 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): KemiahOwoh (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by KemiahOwoh (talk) 21:30, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 3 September 2025 and 8 December 2025. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): DrResearchMethods (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by DrResearchMethods (talk) 20:52, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

I do not see the connection between the two things. Suturn (talk) 09:04, 6 November 2025 (UTC)