Symbolic Obstetric Violence: Radio Baracoa Accused of Exposing a Woman and Her Baby on Social Media

The first birth of 2025 in the municipality of Baracoa, Guantánamo, could have been a beautiful report highlighting life and hope in a new year.

However, the media coverage of the event by the station Radio Baracoa generated criticism for showing images of several women in the midst of labor and postpartum, alongside their newborns, without ensuring the necessary ethical or privacy conditions.

The journalist and feminist activist Marta María Ramírez reported this incident through her Facebook profile, indicating that Radio Baracoa engaged in symbolic obstetric violence by justifying the public exposure of the woman and her baby under the argument of “consent”.

According to Ramírez, in contexts of power asymmetry, such as those faced by women during childbirth, genuine consent cannot be considered valid due to the physical and emotional vulnerability of the mother and her dependence on the medical staff and the circumstances at that moment.

Moreover, she emphasized that the asymmetry of power is a crucial factor in these situations, where a woman's ability to make free and informed decisions is severely compromised.

Women in labor are in a state of vulnerability that limits their ability to process information or resist external pressures, whether from medical personnel or journalists present at the scene,” she explained in her post.

The case of Radio Baracoa highlights the lack of ethical protocols for media coverage of events in medical contexts.

The images broadcasted by the station show the woman in an intimate and vulnerable moment, without ensuring her dignity or privacy.

Furthermore, the photographs do not show the presence of a companion, a figure that should be present according to international health regulations, reinforcing the idea of systematic obstetric violence in the delivery rooms of the island, the feminist emphasized.

The activist also drew attention to the psychological impact that these practices can have on women, as being publicly exposed in such an intimate moment can cause humiliation, shame, and stress, especially if the magnitude of the dissemination is not understood at the time of the supposed authorization.

This constitutes not only an ethical violation but also a transgression of fundamental rights such as privacy and medical confidentiality.

Another important point noted by Ramírez is the misuse of the concept of consent to justify these practices.

Even if prior authorization is requested, it is difficult to argue that this is completely free and conscious in such an unequal context.

The activist questioned the actions of Radio Baracoa and the medical staff present, reminding that their primary responsibility should be to protect the rights and dignity of the patients, not to expose themselves to media or institutional interests.

This case has reignited the debate over obstetric violence in Cuba, an issue that encompasses not only media exposure but also the conditions under which women undergo the childbirth process.

Ramírez emphasized that the institutions involved must be held accountable and establish strict protocols to ensure respect for patients, their rights, and their well-being: “The first day of the year could have been a celebration of life, but it ended up being a reminder of how much we still need to progress in respecting women in this country,” he concluded.

Controversy on social media over Radio Baracoa's responses: Criticism of ethical handling and lack of sensitivity

“At 10:32 AM on January 1, the first birth of 2025 took place at the hospital in Baracoa. A curious reporter was there to capture the moment," stated Radio Baracoa on its Facebook profile, noting that the report and the images were made by Richard López Castellanos.

The post, which included photographs of the mother in labor and with her newborn baby, aimed to highlight the beginning of the year with the arrival of new life.

However, the exposure of these images on social media without an apparent ethical context or consideration for privacy generated criticism regarding the limits of media coverage in moments of high vulnerability.

Yisel Pérez Alba expressed: “Perhaps the intention is good, but the methods leave much to be desired. Where is the privacy of these women? Everyone watching those mothers with their legs spread during such an intimate and sensitive moment.”

Additionally, he questioned the lack of parental support in contrast to the presence of reporters: “Parents are not allowed in the delivery room, but reporters are allowed to enter and capture those intimate and private images, exposing them to the world. That’s not right.”

Speaking from her personal experience, Pérez added: “And I speak as a woman who has given birth twice, and the last thing I would want is to see photos of myself circulating on social media like that. The report could have been done, of course, but the dignity and privacy of those mothers could have been protected as well.”

Radio Baracoa responded: “We respect your opinion, although it tends to be personal and absolute. Please know that in cases like this, Cuban journalists and media outlets uphold a commitment, and consent,” the radio station pointed out without showing the slightest sign of empathy.

Dalianni Abella Montero expressed: “I truly was astonished when I saw those images. What madness, for God's sake!”, reflecting her surprise and indignation at the photographs shared by the broadcaster.

In response to this reaction, Radio Baracoa stated: “Do you know if it was authorized? That's where your observation should begin,” in a comment that is a brief and distant defense, without addressing the criticisms regarding the ethical management of media exposure at such an intimate moment.

Merquicedis Lobaina Rivera commented: “But there are photos that surely neither she nor her family would want to be exposed. I think it’s a lack of scruples. They even show almost the vulva when they are cutting the cord of the baby. They could have selected the photos beforehand to create that report.”

In response, Radio Baracoa stated: “Little is gained from assumptions. Thank you for commenting,” a dismissive reply that belittles the legitimate concern of the user regarding the insensitivity in the selection of the images shared.

Daniuska Cala commented: “I am sure that mother, feeling that pain, would not authorize such photos. Did the cyclone impact her mind as she passed through Imías or did the reporter misunderstand something? In our hospital, this is not allowed. The hospital's leaders surely are not in tune with this because such photos are not permitted. The privacy of that mother, please, Radio Baracoa, where is your ethics? I work in that institution and I repeat: the mother may have authorized it, but not those photos. Especially in that closed area, it is not allowed. Again, I say that the institution's leaders must not be aware of this situation. The whole world is watching.”

Radio Baracoa responded confrontationally: “In your words, they should have blindfolded the mother when the pictures were taken. You speak of ethics, which is very important. Now, did you ever consider where yours stands when assuming what the mother authorized or did not, and expressing an opinion that, when questioned, turns out to be both questionable and irresponsible?”

Yarka Gomero stated: "The only word that defines this: disgusting." Her reaction reflects a strong criticism of the publication of the images, deeming them inappropriate and disrespectful.

For her part, Tamara Toirac Guilarte stated: “Has Radio Baracoa ever heard 'The excuse exacerbates the fault'? If it were authorized, you would have presented it from the beginning. I understand the feelings of empathy and the beautiful point the reporter wanted to highlight, but the photos of the lady, in those circumstances, without authorization, I repeat, is a lack of ethics.”

Radio Baracoa responded confrontationally to both comments. To Yarka Gomero, it said: “Expressing a personal, superficial, and irresponsible opinion like yours will not make you more respectable. Is that your ethics? A poor reflection.” It also added: “Are you referring to your comment? Please clarify, because you seem to be confused.”

In response to Tamara Toirac Guilarte, the broadcaster stated: "You should know that the obvious does not need to be explained beyond what is necessary for children. By insisting, merely because you assume, on the matter of the photos, you display a bewildering misjudgment."

The tone of the responses has generated additional criticism, as instead of fostering a thoughtful dialogue, they were perceived as dismissive and unresponsive to legitimate ethical concerns.

This type of interaction highlights the lack of sensitivity from the medium in addressing the audience's concerns.

Frequently Asked Questions about Reporting Symbolic Obstetric Violence in Baracoa