Men and Women in Midwifery

by Allison Nelson (Vanderbilt University)

In the early modern period, midwifery began to change from a female art into a male occupation. The shift was not a smooth one. Indeed, it began in 1522, when Dr. Wertt of Hamburg dressed up as a woman in order to observe midwives and learn about childbirth. When he was discovered as a man, Wertt was burned alive. Later in the mid-sixteenth century, however, the renowned surgeon Pare laid a more solid foundation for men's work in the birthing room; he did this by aiding in delivery by pulling babies out of the womb by their feet during difficult births.

A contributing factor in this shift of gender roles was Louis XIV's use of male midwives to deliver his illegitimate children. As men delivered his mistresses babies, male midwives gained popularity. A rapid population boom in Europe further encouraged these social changes; as the population grew and universities increased their study of reproduction and anatomy, childbirth became a medicalized and, thus, masculinized domain. Case studies, rather than oral tradition, became the preferred method for educating individuals about childbirth (1).

There existed three recognized distinctions between male and female midwives. First, the men held a monopoly over medical tools, which women were disallowed from owning. Second, the male midwives were more formally educated in universities; there they dissected bodies, read case-studies, and learned about classical theories. Women, on the other hand, were taught through experience; they apprenticed and learned through women's household manuals. Third, male and female midwives viewed patients differently. While women's manuals emphasize individual relationships and take a maternal tone, men's manuals stressed quantitative practices and medical causality (2).

Even as male midwives gained popularity, their acceptance was not unanimous. Some people believed that men did not belong in the birthing room; since men could never experience childbirth, some believed it was beyond the realm of male expertise. Such critics often cited the Bible, claiming the absence of men at recorded births. Other critics viewed male midwives as interlopers into other men's domestic territory. In a space where the husband or father was absent, the male midwife's presence stood out as inappropriate; it raised questions about the male midwives' potentially inappropriate behavior toward vulnerable female bodies. Thus issues of female modesty and male property emerged, and opponents called upon husbands to bar male midwives from their homes (3).

While gender issues caused debate, so too did suspicion about scientific instruments and their over-use in the birthing room. Frequently, male midwives used tools even in "normal" births that might not necessitate them -- and the tools posed additional risks. Not only did the tools threaten additional infections, but their misuse could harm the baby or its mother. Renowned female midwife Sarah Stone, for example, claimed that in her career she had only seen four cases that could have been safer through the use of tools (4).

Image: Fores, Samuel William. "A Man-Mid-Wife." From Man-Midwifery Dissected. London, 1793. (Wellcome Library, London)

(1) Schnorrenberg. "Is Childbirth Any Place for a Woman? The Decline of Midwifery in Eighteenth-Century England." Studies in Eighteenth Century Culture (10) 1981: 393.

(2)Fife, Ernelle. "Gender and Professionalism in Eighteenth-Century Culture." Women's Writing (11:2) 2004: 185-200.

(3)Blunt, John. "Man-Midwifery Dissected: or, The Obstetric Family Instructor." 1793.

(4) Stone, Sarah. "A Complete Practice of Midwifery." 1737.

Stumble Upon Toolbar


  1. Interesting history lesson!

    Having used midwives for both my children's births, I'm a big fan of CNMs. I delivered my babies in hospitals. Even with a traumatic and emergency situation where a doctor had to take over, the midwives were there advocating for me and were there when I awoke from the surgery, taking care of my needs.

    Thanks for this interesting info!

  2. Good post, explains well the foundations of a problem that still rages today: male or female OB/GYN, homebirth or hospital, midwife or MD.

    I'm really happy that today we have so many choices. I've become convinced that different moms and childbirth situations suggest different care plans.

    Personally, I chose a male OB/GYN and a hospital birth, but other women have very different ideas and there's nothing wrong with that.

  3. So interesting! Poor Dr. Wertt. Thanks for this really informative post. As ever, I learn something new everytime I come to visit.

  4. You often hear similar arguments today about the roles of (usually) female midwives and (usually) male obstetricians. It's strange to think the controversy has been running for so long.

  5. Holly- I am pleased to report that you have an award waiting for you at my blog:

  6. I found this review fascinating and an intriguing contrast to another history of midwives that I have read in Starhawk's books ("Spiral Dance" and "Truth or Dare"). Not a contradiction, but a different view of history from the perspective of the Goddess cultures. Thank you for this review - I hope to find this book at my local library (or on order through its main website)! I have a regular OB/GYN but their office also has a CRNP-Midwife on staff that I like and trust.


Let us know what you're thinking!

To keep up with what others are saying about this post too, just click "subscribe [to these comments] by email" below.

And, as always, we love reader email:
editor [at]