Final answer:
Personal anecdotes in the article may bring emotion and humanity to the discussion of childbirth without a support system, illustrating the real-life impacts and supporting the narrative of pushback against the medicalization of childbirth, which has been a long-term issue related to institutionalized sexism.
Step-by-step explanation:
Authors often use personal anecdotes to provide a human perspective or to evoke an emotional response from the reader, thereby strengthening the argument about the implications of a new policy or practice. In the context of the article "some women in New York city will have to deliver Babies alone" by Christina Caron and Katie Van Syckle, the use of personal anecdotes likely serves to highlight the emotional and psychological toll that such a policy—whereby women may have to endure childbirth without any support system—can take on expectant mothers. By sharing stories of individuals directly impacted, the authors can illustrate the pushback and challenges faced by women in the face of medicalized childbirth practices, which critics argue have historically been influenced by institutionalized sexism.
The use of personal anecdotes can also serve to challenge the myths associated with pregnancy, as knowledge empowers individuals to make informed decisions. References to historical movements around the medicalization of women's health, such as those led by Margaret Sanger for birth control information dissemination, demonstrate that women have long challenged medical narratives to reclaim agency over their reproductive health. Hence, personal stories may underscore the continuity of women's resistance against medicalization and push for more natural childbirth processes, alongside social support which, according to the sociological critique by Fox and Worts, is as effective as medical support.