- Email: [email protected]
… and Again
successful. However, it is worth the effort to afford her a fulfilling experience. It is especially important for this experience t o be successful if she feels disappointed about the Csection. LINDAS. LOCKE,RN, MPH Assistant Professor of Nursing William Pattercon College Wayne, New Jersey
Abortion Statement Read It Again
...
. ..
To the Editor: In response to your request to “express yourself” I am writing to express my concern about the obviausly proabortion statement of NAACOG and the article “The New Morality, Ethics, and Nursing” in the September/October 1973 JOGN. How is it that a nurses’ association, dedicated to “the highest standards of obstetric, gynecologic, and neonatal nursing practice and education,” can condone abortion? Excuses such as the “New Morality” and the so-called “Population Explosion” are attempts to rationalize that abortion is an acceptable method of birth control. Fellow NAACOG members, read both sides of this issue, find the facts for yourselves, and then stand up and be counted for life! ROSALIE SHAFFER, RN Plymouth, Indiana
. . .and Again T o the Editor: Enclosed is my check for 1974 NAACOG dues, which I have been waiting to send uatil I heard your views on abortion. I was thankful to read (in the SeptemberJOctober 1973 JOGN) that you support a con62
science clause whereby nurses may refuse t o assist with abortion procedures if they find them morally wrong. Please continue to uphold this right. JOANG. HAWKINS, RN Duneden, Florida
JOGN In Ghana T o the Editor: I am a Canadian nurse doing volunteer work in a bush station clinic in Ghana. Obstetric nursing and neonatal care are of particular interest to me. I received a subscription to your magazine as a Christmas gift last year. I have found it a source of many hours of pleasure and an invaluable source of information on changing trends in maternal and child health care. SHARON E. MURHY,SCN, SCH Lake Basunteri Clinic Ghana, West Africa
Basis of Pain Relief To the Editor: As an instructor of psychoprophylactic (Lamaze) preparation for childbirth since 1966, I read Nancy Whitley’s article about its application to second trimester abortion with great interest [“Second Trimester Abortion: A Program of Counseling and Teaching,” JOGN, Sept/Oct 19731. I feel that her comments about the basis of pain relief warrant further discussion. Although psychoprophylaxis (PPM) was understood by Lamaze to rest upon the principles of classical Pavlovian conditioning, more recent investigators (Horowitz, 1967)l have felt that whatever conditioning was present was operant in nature, the
parturient being rewarded for using the techniques by pain reduction. Unlike classical conditioning, moreover, the parturient may choose not to respond by using the techniques. In addition, the effects of stroking, controlled relaxation, and focused attention, fundamentals af PPM technique, are accounted for by the Gate Control T h e o r y of pain mechanism-first described by Melzack and Wall in 1965.2 This theory, which is the most widely accepted today, places the modulating effects at the spinal level, before the ascending nerve fibers can activate the action system which is responsible for perception. This is in contrast to primary emphasis being placed on the cerebral cortex, as was understood by Velvovsky, writing in 1954.
PATRICIA HASSID, RN, Co-Director Council of Childbirth Education Specialists, INC New York, New York 1. Horowitz, Mardi: , “Psychologic Ef-
fects of Education for Childbirth.” Psychosomatics Vol VIII, July 1967 2. Melzack, Ronald, and Patrick Wall: “Pain Mechanisms, A New Theory,” Science, Vol 150, No 3699, Nov 1%5
Editor’s note: The original manuscript included a discussion of classical Pavlovian conditioning versus operant conditioning and included the Horowitz reference as well as other historical background. However, the editor and author felt the readers would be familiar with much of this material. From the author: I am puzzled by Mrs. Hassid’s assertion that the gate control theory is “the most widely accepted today,” since this has not been my experience, at least not with other childbirth educators. T o enlarge on Mrs. Hassid’s comments, the gating mechaMarch/April
1974
JOGN Nursing
Abortion Statement Read It Again
...
. ..
To the Editor: In response to your request to “express yourself” I am writing to express my concern about the obviausly proabortion statement of NAACOG and the article “The New Morality, Ethics, and Nursing” in the September/October 1973 JOGN. How is it that a nurses’ association, dedicated to “the highest standards of obstetric, gynecologic, and neonatal nursing practice and education,” can condone abortion? Excuses such as the “New Morality” and the so-called “Population Explosion” are attempts to rationalize that abortion is an acceptable method of birth control. Fellow NAACOG members, read both sides of this issue, find the facts for yourselves, and then stand up and be counted for life! ROSALIE SHAFFER, RN Plymouth, Indiana
. . .and Again T o the Editor: Enclosed is my check for 1974 NAACOG dues, which I have been waiting to send uatil I heard your views on abortion. I was thankful to read (in the SeptemberJOctober 1973 JOGN) that you support a con62
science clause whereby nurses may refuse t o assist with abortion procedures if they find them morally wrong. Please continue to uphold this right. JOANG. HAWKINS, RN Duneden, Florida
JOGN In Ghana T o the Editor: I am a Canadian nurse doing volunteer work in a bush station clinic in Ghana. Obstetric nursing and neonatal care are of particular interest to me. I received a subscription to your magazine as a Christmas gift last year. I have found it a source of many hours of pleasure and an invaluable source of information on changing trends in maternal and child health care. SHARON E. MURHY,SCN, SCH Lake Basunteri Clinic Ghana, West Africa
Basis of Pain Relief To the Editor: As an instructor of psychoprophylactic (Lamaze) preparation for childbirth since 1966, I read Nancy Whitley’s article about its application to second trimester abortion with great interest [“Second Trimester Abortion: A Program of Counseling and Teaching,” JOGN, Sept/Oct 19731. I feel that her comments about the basis of pain relief warrant further discussion. Although psychoprophylaxis (PPM) was understood by Lamaze to rest upon the principles of classical Pavlovian conditioning, more recent investigators (Horowitz, 1967)l have felt that whatever conditioning was present was operant in nature, the
parturient being rewarded for using the techniques by pain reduction. Unlike classical conditioning, moreover, the parturient may choose not to respond by using the techniques. In addition, the effects of stroking, controlled relaxation, and focused attention, fundamentals af PPM technique, are accounted for by the Gate Control T h e o r y of pain mechanism-first described by Melzack and Wall in 1965.2 This theory, which is the most widely accepted today, places the modulating effects at the spinal level, before the ascending nerve fibers can activate the action system which is responsible for perception. This is in contrast to primary emphasis being placed on the cerebral cortex, as was understood by Velvovsky, writing in 1954.
PATRICIA HASSID, RN, Co-Director Council of Childbirth Education Specialists, INC New York, New York 1. Horowitz, Mardi: , “Psychologic Ef-
fects of Education for Childbirth.” Psychosomatics Vol VIII, July 1967 2. Melzack, Ronald, and Patrick Wall: “Pain Mechanisms, A New Theory,” Science, Vol 150, No 3699, Nov 1%5
Editor’s note: The original manuscript included a discussion of classical Pavlovian conditioning versus operant conditioning and included the Horowitz reference as well as other historical background. However, the editor and author felt the readers would be familiar with much of this material. From the author: I am puzzled by Mrs. Hassid’s assertion that the gate control theory is “the most widely accepted today,” since this has not been my experience, at least not with other childbirth educators. T o enlarge on Mrs. Hassid’s comments, the gating mechaMarch/April
1974
JOGN Nursing