In the article under study, the authors seek to determine whether baby friendly hospitals are cost effective or costly. This is done through the use of different strategies such as good structure the use of tone and well outlined goals, use of rhetorical strategies among other different strategies. The tone used is a reproachful tone, which comes from the author’s disappointment with the US health system because of failing to adopt baby friendly hospitals. On the structure, the authors present a clear argument in support of the US failure to adopt the system. However, by conducting the study, they present a counterargument that the US failure to adopt the baby friendly system is unexplainable since they are not costly. The rhetorical strategies used include comparison and contrast, claim and critique, which are aimed at criticizing the hospital system’s failure to set up baby friendly hospital systems, which are not costly.
A reproachful tone is used by the researchers after a careful study of the baby friendly system adoption in the US and other countries is done. For example, the researchers explain that the countries like Sweden, Mongolia, Namibia and Eritrea have adopted the system in a 100% score. However, the country notes that the US has only a 2% adoption of the system. The researchers then continue to determine the factors that have led to the non adoption in the US. They find out that the costs of baby friendly hospitals do not vary much from the costs in non baby friendly hospital. This information is used to reproach the US for their non adoption of the method. This tone is used in their conclusion where they argue that the costs of this system are always attributed as the main reason for the non adoption of this system. However, they argue that their findings are that these costs are not significant. Eventually, the reproachful tone in this research used to convince the concerned parties to adopt the system since it is not costly.
Apart from the tone, the structure also proves that the authors’ aims have been achieved. The study, the related results and finally the conclusion are clearly presented by the author thus well presenting their own position regarding the issue. It is also at this point that the researchers eventually go on to present details and background information regarding the whole issue. Out of that, the authors then explore the situation just like it is in some other states and how the baby-friendly hospitals have been adopted.
The other strategy used is a well defined goal, which convinces the reader that baby friendly hospitals are not costly. To achieve this, the authors articulately present a detailed overview of the low economic burden that is incurred after the implementation of baby friendly institutions. For example, the authors find that baby friendly hospitals incur a $2205 cost compared to non baby friendly hospitals where costs of deliveries are at $2170. A well defined goal not only help helps to convince the readers on the usefulness of baby friendly hospital, but also plays an earlier role of reproaching the government for its failure to adopt this system.
Apart from the presented strategies, various rhetorical strategies have been used in order to accomplish the researcher’s goals. To start with the uses use claim as a rhetorical device to arrive at a conclusion that indeed, there are no significant increases in terms of the costs which are associated with the baby friendly hospitals. This conclusion is therefore mainly focused towards the disqualifying of the counter argument and offering to reproach any form of perception which may prevent the adoption of the baby-friendly healthcare institutions. Another rhetorical strategies used include comparison and contrast.
Another rhetorical strategies used include comparison and contrast. Almost the entire essay is built on the comparison of costs in baby friendly hospitals and costs in non baby friendly hospitals. The goal, the structure and all arguments are centered on this rhetorical analysis as it lays the foundation for further arguments. To crown it all, the authors’ uses critique as a rhetorical tool that is meant to criticize the hospital system’s failure to set up baby friendly hospital systems, which are not costly.
In conclusion, it can be ascertained that the major aim of this paper was for the stakeholders in the US healthcare system to change their perception about the costs associated with the implementation and adoption of baby-friendly health care institutions. An argument that can be deduced from the article is that the adoption of the baby-friendly health institutions has no additional costs and due to the benefits associated with it, they should by adopted by all hospitals.