Talk:Bradley method of natural childbirth

Copyright query

{{Cv-unsure|url=https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/w/index.php?title=Bradley_method_of_natural_childbirth&oldid=273553476|date=February 2009}} Yellowweasel (talk)

The spammy copyvio was added and reverted multiple times: [1][2][3][4][5][6]. It remains out of the article. Closing. MER-C 09:45, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can't confirm citation on 86% natural childbirth outside of Bradley website

Where's the research that generated this statistic? This citation simply links to the Bradley method homepage where the claim is baldly made without any citation. I can't see where this claim can actually be substantiated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pythagras (talk • contribs) 15:21, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Trademarks??

What's with all the registered trademarks? This is wikipedia, not a marketing brochure! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.44.25.88 (talk) 23:01, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See [7]. MER-C 09:45, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Marketing speech?

To me this seems like blatant use of Wikipedia for marketing with all the trademark-signs and the overall tone of the text. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.85.133.172 (talk) 09:54, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's that bad, but yeah, this is basically the informational blurb for a Bradley Method class. It would be good to get some neutral editors in here, but unfortunately that is probably not me, as I'm partway through a class right now :) Heh, I was actually coming here hoping to see some criticisms, so I know which parts to take with a grain of salt -- but no dice! --Jaysweet (talk) 19:28, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I added the template.Pisharov (talk) 00:25, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See [8]. MER-C 09:46, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Copy/Paste

Added template. Read the article and you'll know why. Pisharov (talk) 00:29, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See [9]. MER-C 09:46, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lacks distinct description

So...what IS the Bradley Method? This article sucks. I'd really like to see some specific information regarding this method of childbirth and there is none. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeaide (talk • contribs) 02:42, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree the article could be more detailed, but I guess no editor has had the time yet to write it out more fully. Should you really need more details, you can read Dr. Bradley's book Husband-Coached Childbirth which is listed in Sources. There seems to be a 5th edition out now. And then maybe you can add the much needed more information to this article. Selerian (talk) 17:56, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I added some things in response to the comments on the talk page.

I added a more distinct description of the Bradley Method itself, as well as some common criticisms of the method.

I, with a little help from my husband, wrote this page originally, and someone else jumped in with all the talk about the Hathaways and all the registered trademarks. It's a Bradley thing. The American Academy of Husband Coached Childbirth (AAHCC), though well intended, insists that the trademark symbol be added any time the words "The Bradley Method" appear in print. It is my opinion that they don't fully understand the proper use of the symbol. It would be my guess that that specific revision was made by someone at the AAHCC, so although it probably wasn't a copyright violation, it wasn't exactly wikipedia-compliant, either.

At any rate, I see that although the page I wrote was added to as mentioned above, it has been reverted back the the page I wrote. I attempted to be as unbiased as possible but I admit that I am a Bradley teacher, so it's possible that my bias creeps into my writing without my realization.

The citations I added are not great, but they do take a reader to the AAHCC's website where these claims are made. Suggestions for better cited sources are welcome.

This is my only contribution to Wikipedia thus far and I'm just trying to help. Can someone tell me what the "template" Pisharov mentioned is?

Also, I was thinking of adding that there is some evidence basis for the pain coping techniques we use in that relaxation is considered to be an effective pain relief tool. Our (Bradley teachers') materials cite a CDC study as backup for this claim. Would putting this in the article seem too ad-like?

Please bear with me and be kind. The statement above that "this article sucks" sort of stung. I am hoping it was referring to the version that wasn't completely written by me. Constructive criticism is always better, people. Thanks. Taralynn60 (talk) 04:39, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. Robert A. Bradley Section

Since Dr. Robert A. Bradley redirects to this page, it should include a section about him and his beliefs, perhaps highlighting some of the additional beliefs he carried but are not a part of the Bradley method. In his book, for instance, he talks about the roll of telepathy, clairvoyance, and other unsubstantiated phenomena in child rearing. --WikiGuy3 (talk) 06:48, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Breastfeeding

I noticed that this article has been placed in the category Breastfeeding but the article fails to explain what the connection is between the Bradley method and breastfeeding. I'm guessing that it has to do with the fact that natural childbirth is recommended as a way to avoid complications with breastfeeding that can come with the use of epidurals and drug-based pain relief methods. If so, then that should be explained in the article. --Cab88 (talk) 13:13, 21 May 2011 (UTC) (Corrected for grammar and spelling) OntarioBoy 02:50, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Bradley method of natural childbirth. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150402131027/http://www.birthingyourwaytoday.com/Dr._Robert_A_Bradley.html to http://www.birthingyourwaytoday.com/Dr._Robert_A_Bradley.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:29, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bradley method of natural childbirth. 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/20150402131027/http://www.birthingyourwaytoday.com/Dr._Robert_A_Bradley.html to http://www.birthingyourwaytoday.com/Dr._Robert_A_Bradley.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 12:43, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]