Pregnant women have numerous reasons behind their unwillingness to attend prenatal screening and diagnosis. The article provided discusses various reasons behind this trend. Additionally, it illuminates the research provisions executed to unveil the matter, results attained, and discussion of the findings. According to the article, most of the pregnant women fear the well-being of their fetus since the intended examination might cause various complications. The exercise might cause an amniotic disruption thus risking the life of the fetus. Additionally, in case there are some complications and deformities with the pregnancy and fetus respectively, the mother might be forced to abort.
We will write a custom Critical Writing on Prenatal Screening and Diagnosis Denial Reasons specifically for you
301 certified writers online
This move is against the wills of most mothers since they would prefer to carry the fetus to full term and allow nature to take its own course (Tercyak, 2010). Concurrently, they fear medical dominance over the concerned pregnancy. Other discouraging issues include the risk of fetal harm or loss, miscarriage, and probable uncertainties. This paper evaluates various issues fronted in the article with respect to approach given to the analysis, study design, theoretical insights, claims, negative cases, and descriptions. The critiquing presents both positive and negative sides of the issues fronted.
Whether the approach to analysis and the techniques used are well-described
Evidently, the approach assumed to unveil why some women would not prefer prenatal screening and diagnosis is well-described. This is notable on the research designed, data collection methods, data compilation, analysis, and presentation. Additionally, substantial findings presented emerged from a well-described and executed analysis/techniques used in this study despite the negative sides.
From this context, it is apparent that the study design and how the researchers executed their studies present considerable analytical provisions although some loopholes exist. A substantial description of the literature review on the matter and other health provisions regarding screening and diagnosis of pregnant women give a clear picture of why any woman should or should not undergo the mentioned prenatal screening and diagnosis.
Additionally, the study has described the methodology used in a decisive manner. This gives a clear picture of how the study progressed and other relevant provisions in this regard. It is from this context that the mentioned approach to the study analysis meets its vast description of the entire processes (Porth, 2011). The approach, which the study assumed is evident, considerable, and comprehensible in various contexts. However, the study to some extent meets its objectives and desired results. Additionally, the entire study is moderately decipherable and lucid in the realms of processes, findings, and discussion of results retrieved.
Whether there is theory development in the form of step by step account of how theoretical insights build up
This study has endured to provide a step by step theory development although some parts do not conform to this claim. Agreeably, the authors have built up their research based on factual claims and investigations executed through a well-selected research group. This provides the theory development with a step by step provision with regard to this scenario. However some parts of the article do not provide the stepwise theoretical development.
Additionally, the fact that study design incorporated the aspects of literature review concerning the provisions of prenatal screening and diagnosis gives coherent and valuable theories regarding the topic (Pillitteri, 2009). Additionally, providing valuable and well-defined theories on the matter gives step by step provisions demanded in any professionalized study.
A negative effect is that this study involved a sensitive, contentious, and vital issue amongst pregnant women not only in Australia but also beyond. The article does not show extensively why women will prefer prenatal screening and diagnosis as it deed to the otherwise groups. Most women will hardly prefer the aspects of prenatal screening and diagnosis due to numerous reasons ranging from fear of looming pregnancy complications to unwanted medical prescriptions and other associated risks. The ways these issues are presented indicate some coherency and presentation of validated issues in this context. The approach has granted the achievement of the desired information with respect to prenatal screening and diagnosis although some negative provisions exist.
The claims presented in the study are precise, substantiated, and consumable by masses although there are challenging opinions. It is factual that some women hardly prefer attending prenatal screening and diagnosis due to numerous reasons ranging from personal choices to social and medical issues. This is a constructive claim fronted by this study. Additionally, other facts presented by the study emerge from researchable claims indicating the validity of the theories fronted and their contextual appropriateness.
The claims in this study are not empty since the study has endured to substantiate them through a stringent and well-orchestrated study design and literature review. They endure to provide the real medical instinct concerning the matter (Pillitteri, 2009). Pregnant women have various reasons behind their desire to attend such medical exterminations or not.
This is an important provision in the context of prenatal health care. The claims by some women that they might be forced to abort the fetus if found with deformities are unsubstantiated in this very context. There are numerous benefits of executing critical and professional prenatal screening and diagnosis. The benefits surpass the risks despite the resistance from some women. Some of the claims made by defiant women are invaluable and demands a massive rethink. Additionally, the study has elaborated on the matter giving critical insights from various viewpoints hence validating the claims fronted in the entire context.
Whether there is attention given to negative cases
The article/study has provided massive attention to negative cases to help in taking a fair standpoint regarding the study to some extent. This show that there are some otherwise opinions exist. Additionally, it has provided elaborated viewpoints taking into consideration both sides of the matter. Eventually, the issues emerging have been presented fairly as indicated earlier. Another important provision in this context relates to the aspects of medical attentions and preferences of pregnant women with regard to prenatal screening and diagnosis.
Presenting both sides fairly has forced the study to provide some attention to the negative case of the matter. Evidently, prenatal screening and diagnosis have various benefits; nonetheless, it also possesses negative stipulations when considered critically. This supports the claims by women who are against the act. The negative features of the phenomenon are apparent on both sides of the story. When considering the benefits of the prenatal screening, numerous medical issues emerge, which promote the application of the concerned prenatal trends (Whittle & Rodeck, 1999).
Nonetheless, there are various issues that disregard this provision in the health realms. This relates to the aspects of risks and anxieties associated with the screening and diagnostic provisions demanded during pregnancy. Creating a viable argument and helpful research on the matter has provided a comprehensive presentation of findings. This relates to the provisions fof negative issues on the matter. Precisely, the article has given attention to negative case as evident from its contents. This has provided prominent provision in this context.
Get your first paper with 15% OFF
Whether there is rich description
Evidently, the article has endured to provide a rich and massive description of the issues regarding why pregnant women hardly prefer prenatal screening and diagnosis. However, some of its components are unclear and incomprehensible due to numerous assumptions the authors made. The process is important to the wellbeing of expectant mothers. It makes expectant mothers prepare for certainties discoverable in the entire context. It is from this provision that the vastness of this study emerges in the realms of description and authenticity.
Additionally, the description of the study design and how the research was conducted gives a rich picture of the entire scenario and helps in authenticating the entire information (Callahan & Caughey, 2009). The article has described the entire aspects of this phenomenon ranging from research methodology to literature review and findings. The results provided and discussions fronted are descriptive in nature and front various contents of the matter. This allows readers to grasp numerous concepts fronted in this study. Precisely, the study is considerably rich in description and provides the exact information required in the context of prenatal screening and diagnosis despite the negative opinions.
Prenatal screening and diagnosis has numerous benefits to the concerned women. Nonetheless, most mothers hardly prefer such provisions due to numerous reasons indicated earlier. It is evident that the article has extensively described its approach to analysis and the techniques used in the study; however, there are negative critics regarding this claim. Additionally, there is a stepwise description of the theoretical development and insights. The aspects of negative cases are equally evident with respect to the discussed prenatal screening and diagnostic phenomenon.
Callahan, T. & Caughey, A. (2009). Blueprints obstetrics & gynecology. Pennsylvania, PA: Wolters Kluwer Health/Lippincott William & Wilkins.
Pillitteri, A. (2009). Maternal and child health nursing: Care of the childbearing and childrearing family. Pennsylvania, PA: Lippincott William & Wilkins.
Porth, C.(2011). Essentials of pathophysiology: Concepts of altered health states. Pennsylvania, PA: Wolters Kluwer Health/Lippincott William & Wilkins.
Tercyak, K. (2010). Handbook of genomics and the family: Psychosocial contact for children and adolescents. New York, N.Y: Springer.
Whittle, M. & Rodeck, C. (1999). Fetal medicine: Basic science and clinical practice. London: Livingstone.