supervision, part 2

Beautiful Brisbane, the city of my birth

continuing from yesterday's post, ...

[I have posted these comments on a social media site that might not be accessed by many of my readers, so have copied and expanded it here.]

A blog post by UK midwife-author-teacher Sarah Wickham, questioning the Australian regulation of midwives, provides comment on the UK model of supervision of midwives.

 
I share Sarah Wickham's concern, when midwives are subjected to "vexatious reporting and persecution in a number of ways, simply for supporting women’s choices."
 
Without pointing the finger at any person, and I wasn't at the recent homebirth conference in Brisbane, I think it's likely that Sarah has heard only a fraction of the story.  In my opinion there have been too many cases recently, some on public record, in which midwives have hidden behind a notion of the woman's choice, when in fact there was no discussion of escalation of care and appropriate intervention.  Midwifery partnership can only be achieved when the conversation between the midwife and the woman is ongoing, and informed *decisions* are made rather than choices.

An effective program of professional supervision of midwives could, theoretically at least, support the midwife in real time whose client is making an informed decision that does not follow usual professional advice.  This would apply whether the midwife was in private practice or employed in a hospital or other birthing facility.   The UK model of supervision of midwives is for all midwives.
 
A midwife can't afford to be a true believer, or to 'trust birth' in any idealistic way, even though we act to promote, protect and support normal birth and the physiological adaptation of the newborn to life out of the womb.
 
The setting/place of birth (home/hospital) has become an obstacle in this country to good midwifery practice, because privately practising midwives are restricted to homebirth.  The exclusion of PP midwives from mainstream hospital is not in the interests of wellbeing and safety of mother and baby, and probably contributes in complex (and unaccountable) ways to some adverse outcomes. The midwife's duty of care includes what we do in emergencies, and accessing medical (ie hospital) help in a timely manner. 
 
The introduction of the wonderful www, and social media, and digital communication ... has had a profound impact on some women's access to information about birth, and their choices. Anyone who remembers 20 years ago, when homes didn't have internet access, and mobile phones were great big clunky devices, will know what I mean. Now women tell me they have 'researched' their choices, as though it's done and dusted. The rise and rise of freebirthing is very much an internet phenomenon.
 
Please keep the conversation happening.

availability of midwives for homebirths

Today I would like to explore a few issues around the availability of midwives to provide professional services for homebirth, and suggest what I see as a way forward.

These issues come under different headings, such as risk, cost, and practical matters such as distance the midwife needs to travel.

'Risk' - however defined - is a major obstacle.  The narrow definition of risk declares that every birth carries substantial risk, and that the only responsible place for birth to take place is in hospital.  This narrow mindedness is not informed by evidence or by logic.

The next level of risk puts it this way: It's OK to plan homebirth if everything is normal, and excludes significant numbers of women in the birthing population, such as those who have had a previous caesarean birth.

With the increased availability of publicly funded, hospital based homebirth programs, women who decline some 'standard' test or investigation are excluded.  A woman who makes what she considers to be an informed decision to avoid exposing her unborn child to routine ultrasound is told she is not permitted to continue in the homebirth program.  Similarly, a woman who indicates her desire to have an unmedicated/unmanaged third stage is told she can do that in hospital, but not at home.

Most readers of this blog probably realise that these restrictions that exist in our world today are based more on fear of birth than potential risk to the woman or her baby.

These distorted and uninformed responses to perceived risk should be discussed critically by midwives who understand the protective effect that is achieved when a well woman works in harmony with natural physiological processes.  Yet midwives say very little. 

These distorted and uninformed responses to perceived risk should be addressed logically and carefully by the maternity decision-makers in mainstream hospitals, providing suitable pathways for women whose risk status is not at the bottom of the ladder.  An obvious pathway is that a midwife who the woman trusts is available to attend as primary carer throughout the episode of care.  Yet the only place a woman can have her own midwife as her primary carer is in privately attended homebirth.  Public hospitals in Melbourne seem to be more committed than ever to preventing midwives from having clinical privileges/visiting access.  When midwives do attend a woman in a public hospital they often experience rudeness and disrespect towards the woman and themselves.

$$ Cost is significant in private homebirth.  While the midwives need to make enough money to sustain their practices, the cost of the service needs to be acceptable to the women who employ midwives.  Medicare rebates for antenatal and postnatal services are small by comparison with the fees that midwives are charging.  For example, a woman in my care will pay me approximately $2,500 for the episode of care, and may receive $500-$700 in Medicare rebate.  The Medicare rebate for intrapartum midwifery services is limited to hospital births with a Medicare-eligible midwife, and as mentioned, that is not an option.

The other factor in cost of private homebirth is the number of midwives.  Traditionally midwives have often worked in pairs, and many of my colleagues, particularly around Melbourne, require two midwives to be booked for homebirth, bringing the expected cost of the booking to $5000 or more.  A recent statement by a Sydney midwife-academic to a coroner's inquest indicated her belief that two midwives are an essential part of planned homebirth.  I disagree.  Strongly!

I have been told that some women who want to plan homebirth have chosen an unregulated woman (doula) as a cheaper alternative to two midwives.  I cannot support this option - it scares me.  I wonder if midwives who demand the 'two midwives' rule feel any responsibility for the apparently increasing rates of planned 'freebirth', either with or without a doula?  A doula speaking to me recently indicated that a woman she has met is considering freebirth, "with me there just to support her".

Practical matters: the main one that comes to mind is the distance across this wide brown land.  Gone are the days of the village midwife on her bike.  Each time I visit a client, I am using precious fuel.  Likewise, each time a woman comes to me.  If a woman lives closer to another private midwife, I will always ask her to consider employing that midwife.  (An exception is a few special women who I have attended on several occasions over the years.  I have become a part of those families, and it's lovely to return for the birth of the next baby.)

Speaking practically, there's no reason why midwives in every town and city across this country should not be able and willing to attend women locally for birth, guiding the women as to their need to be attended in hospital, or at home.  Ageing midwives like me should not be needing to drive an hour or two in our cars to get to the women.

Yet the culture of fear and distrust of birth has destroyed midwives' confidence in their own ability to be 'with woman'.   

What am I saying?

I believe midwives need to take more assertive action to promote and protect normal birth, including homebirth. 

• midwives need to think critically about risk
• midwives need to work to make primary maternity care by a known midwife affordable
• midwives need to wake up to their capacity to provide midwifery services in homes and hospitals, for all women.

the death of a baby

I am writing with deep sympathy for the family who lost their baby in late 2010, and for the midwives and doctors who attended the mother.

I am writing about this because the Melbourne Coroner is currently hearing evidence from the various parties.  In time the Coroner's report will be published.  The Coroner's job is to find out what happened, in a respectful and unbiased way.  At present fragments of information have been published in newspapers and online news sites.  Some pieces of the information circulating in the media are factual, while others are contested.

I am writing because this case raises issues that are similar to a case that I wrote about a couple of months ago.

It is difficult for me to write.  I know the midwives; they are my colleagues, and we have shared in professional and personal journeys over the years.  I know the hospital; I have been there with women many times over the years.  I know the mother, who was a member of a peer support group I facilitated a few years ago.

The big issues as I understand this and similar cases are around a midwife's duty of care, a woman's decision-making, and the need for women to be able to feel respected in maternity hospitals.

The questions that I asked in my previous post are still pertinent:
"If a mother does not want to go to hospital, when overwhelming professional advice would want her to give birth in hospital, WHY?", and
"What can be done to make going to hospital a more acceptable choice for women for whom complex obstetric care may become necessary?"


I have many thoughts that I will not make public at present. 

Another reflection on practice

Photo used with permission

The mother in this picture, Cynthia, gave birth at home to her second child at home against medical advice. Her first child, born at a Birth Centre, had been too large, and she was told she had bled too much, so she was not permitted to book at the Birth Centre for her second birth: the advice was that she would require obstetric management.

This is a not uncommon situation, even when 'alternative' birthing services, such as midwife-managed birth centres, are accessible. It presents a challenge for midwife as well as mother, as we find our way through the often unpredictable terrain of pregnancy and birthing. Yet it could be argued that all home births are against medical advice.

Cynthia gave birth to baby Willa at home, early in the morning, as the first light of the new day filtered through the glass above the door on the Eastern wall.  I hold that memory of hushed ecstasy, as we who were witnesses to the miracle of birth watched the mother welcome her newborn daughter.

Cynthia has given me permission to use this beautiful photo, and to use her name as I tell a small part of her story. I am taking the opportunity to reflect on aspects of this birth, and the conversations I had with Cynthia in the months before the birth. Cynthia was strong in her resolve; she had discovered within herself a deep and precious knowledge of her birthing potential, and she asked me to accompany her through the most demanding part of this birthing journey.


With this recent birth in mind, I have been delighted to start reading a new book The Heart in the Womb, by Amali Lokugamage, an obstetrician who defied her profession's wisdom and gave birth to her son at home in the UK.  Amali writes:

I was prompted to write about this very personal experience because, prior to my pregnancy, I was never fully able to understand why a woman would actively choose to give birth at home, outside of a hospital safety-net." (p6)

The idea that being in a hospital for every birth provides a safety-net is one of the great 'lies' under which most Australian maternity services operate.  When a woman discovers her own strength, she arranges her life so that she will not be denied that potential when she is at the peak of her labour.  She chooses her team: midwife, sister, friend, and lover - each in a different partnership relationship with her, and each fully committed to being with her.

I cannot teach a woman how to discover her own innate birthing potential.  It is truly a discovery that she makes as she welcomes the hormonally mediated activity that her body leads her through.  I cannot predict who will progress unassisted to an ecstatic birth; who will gently guide the head of her own baby across the threshold of totally streched perineal tissues; who will enjoy that amazing dance of the breast crawl, and feel the pressure as the placenta presents for expulsion.

But I can reflect on my own memories of my birthings, many years ago, and I can confidently accompany women who are willing to engage in trust and reciprocity, and explore their own journeys as they give birth to their babies.

The birth of Richie Jack

It is with a deep sense of respect and privilege that I share this birth story link with my readers. You are invited to go to Ashley's blog and read her story.


As the midwife I experience a parallel journey. Together we negotiate the often unpredictable and challenging terrain that leads to birth. Our partnership requires trust that goes both ways - she needs to feel able to trust me, and I her.

As I read Ash's birth story, I was reminded of my own emotional journey, and the series of decisions that were made. I felt challenged as time passed - of course I would have loved to see it all happen spontaneously.

Today I visited Ash and little Richie, and as we had a cup of tea together we chatted about the birth, and all that has transpired since then. As we packed the deflated birth pool into its box, and put it in the car boot, there was no sense of loss in our minds. The birth pool had not been used, and Ash had given birth in the hospital. The hospital was the right place for this birth; the best place.

What more could we ask?