Male midwife facing 29 charges of misconduct,

Expressed myself badly. All medical practitioners should be well supervised. Medical malpractice is of course a thing. But to say no men can become midwives is an overreaction. Just as I wouldn't want women excluded from a specialism either.
I also wouldn't want all women to be told they couldn't be midwives after the one who failed in my care and contributed to an emergency c-section.

Stereotypes help no one. Better supervision abs listening to colleagues who raise issues? Yes
This suspicion of everyone isn't really helpful

So we cant be suspicious but let's supervise everyone more isn't that in itself suspicion?

The male midwife who I saw was fabulous. Genuinely. Far better than the bank member of staff who put the line in wrong for my fluids over night.
Stereotypes help no one. Better supervision abs listening to colleagues who raise issues? Yes.
This suspicion of everyone isn't really helpful.

Hi , apologies in delay
Chaperone can be a HCA , an admin person , another midwife or that patient relative
We inform patients prior to attending the clinic that we have a male midwife and if they prefer not to be seen by him then let us know so we can make alternative arrangements, we also give them that choice on arrival as not all patients have access to emails , or can read or write in English

I agree that perhaps some women may not want to offend but in our large clinic , there has never been a time when we could not provide a chaperone

As said by another poster - if we needed help the majority of us would not refuse a male Dr

He was almost never asked to leave patient rooms, because professors introduced him as “a member of our care team” instead of a “male medical student.”

It’s quite clear those patients didn’t have a choice and were misled into thinking he was a doctor instead of a student.

Supporting a woman in labour - giving a back massage or just sitting quietly with a hand on the abdomen feeling the contractions.

Not sure what hospitals other MNers go to, because my experiences of midwives and care through 3 births and 2 losses has never been like this. During my births I barely noticed the sex of the midwife, because they were rarely in evidence, and when they were they were run off their feet, or it was because things were going badly and we all had other things to focus on.

Women should have the right to a female team, and of course men or women in any medical role should be struck off in the case of improper conduct, but I think it's still worse to make any profession single sex.

And this is why I had it written clearly into my birth plan - no male midwives. And will be doing so again for baby number 2

Fanny - great post.

Midwifery is a wide ranging job, covering the whole of pregnancy,antenatal care, childbirth and the postnatal period. It is completely different to a male obstetrician rocking up when labour isn't going well to do a LSCS or whatever.
Midwives these days are trained to be alert or to question new patients regarding domestic violence - would it be difficult for a woman in this situation to confide in a male midwife?
Supporting a woman in labour - giving a back massage or just sitting quietly with a hand on the abdomen feeling the contractions.
Supporting breastfeeding, which could include gently expressing milk from an engorged breast, hot and cold bathing engorged breasts, helping fix the baby.
Postnatal visits at home - checking a sore perineum, advising about haemorrhoids, p.v. loss, breasts.
I don't believe a male midwife can do all that a female midwife would.
To go alone into a house where a woman might be alone while her partner has popped to the shops say, and inspect the perineum or massage engorged breasts??? Any man that would do this even if it would be for the best professional reasons, is an idiot - not recognising how he might make a woman feel uncomfortable and also not recognising it would put him at great risk.
So the male midwife can't do the full job and women get a lesser service.
There is lots of research about women not labouring well when they don't feel comfortable and doing better without their male partner in the room (Michel Odent, remember him?).
Ditto breastfeeding - it's important to feel relaxed - the milk won't let down and the baby won't latch if a woman is tense and anxious because a man is handling her breast trying to help.
Not wanting a male midwife isn't just about who delivers the baby.

Blue4You no problem.

You can read the full article here. The foot-stamping is quite something.

www.latimes.com/health/la-me-male-gynos-20180307-htmlstory.html

Men should not be midwives. End of.

100% agree it would be interesting to know how women are being asked

I’d really like to see @coldfeetmama respond to the questions on this page (13)

@greenmarlin
Ah, sorry I didn’t mean to misrepresent you. But yes - how right you are!!

But if male MWs require a chaperone doesn't that make them unsustainable staffing wise? Who is chaperoning them? Are they pulling away other, female MWs from their duties to do so? So women in labour get their care even more compromised in a time of already stretched resource?

Why are these men being pandered to so much? And why is it some HCP here will say "oh yes lots of women say no" and others "oh I've only ever had one say no, luckily'

Makes you wonder if women are actually asked in the first scenario and not in the second.....

@BettyFilous from what a previous poster said, i got the feeling said male MW tend to have a chaperone with them.
(Not that, as you said, it offers a great protection …).

Maybe we need to start by being clear about what are the rules about having a chaperone there when treated by a male HCP.

[quote Blue4YOU]@greenmarlin
Sure - excluding 50% of any type of person will have consequences.
And it shouldn’t come down to even having to consider excluding men.
But in a world where men belittle, behave inappropriately (say taking pictures of Caesarean sections without consent), verbally abuse vulnerable women, sexually assault, rape or film invasive or intimate examinations, try to pressure patients into dates (there have been many of these type suspended by the GMC though rarely struck off at Tribunal), what sensible options are there other than for women to be permitted to express an opinion?
It’s not like researchers into cancer/vaccines etc are examining pelvic areas with labouring women I’d imagine[/quote]
I agree - my point was that in medicine and many other places we operated for a long time with 50% of people being excluded. But suddenly, when that 50% includes male doctors, you "might lose the next person whose going to discover a cure for cancer."

Suddenly it's a big, terrible problem!

I’ve heard of many cases where the chaperone looks uncomfortable with what’s happening and doesn’t say anything.

I’m also wondering why so many people say they wouldn’t want a male MW about will have no issue with a male gynaecologist at the birth (one was there with Dc1 for a ventouse delivery, they are the ones who perform CS etc etc).

I would assume because a woman is in a 1-2-1 situation with a midwife during labour (hospital) and unchaperoned if unaccompanied or her birth partner has stepped out to eat/use the loo etc. By the time an obstetrician shows up, something is likely not going to plan and there are a whole lot more hangers-on. IME that included: medical students, anaesthetists, neonatal nurses, theatre assistants and so on. Even at night the medics in the HDU checking me over normally had a student or junior doctor in tow.

I would not have been keen on a male midwife. I had a very painful, rough vaginal ultrasound from a male ob-gyn consultant at a private abnormality scan that still doesn’t sit right with me. I didn’t dare complain or move because I wanted to know DS was OK. The power imbalance was huge and I felt vulnerable in that moment. I caught the chaperone nurse’s eye and got the impression she was uncomfortable with his behaviour too, but not a word was said.

With that in mind, my thoughts are with the women these men were responsible for in labour and I commend the bravery of the women who complained.

@greenmarlin
Sure - excluding 50% of any type of person will have consequences.
And it shouldn’t come down to even having to consider excluding men.
But in a world where men belittle, behave inappropriately (say taking pictures of Caesarean sections without consent), verbally abuse vulnerable women, sexually assault, rape or film invasive or intimate examinations, try to pressure patients into dates (there have been many of these type suspended by the GMC though rarely struck off at Tribunal), what sensible options are there other than for women to be permitted to express an opinion?
It’s not like researchers into cancer/vaccines etc are examining pelvic areas with labouring women I’d imagine

I knew of one, and I can honestly say that I would have refused to have him. Something just wasn’t right, and I always trust my gut.

"Dr. Saketh Guntupalli, a gynecological oncologist at the University of Colorado, raised the stakes. “If you exclude 50% of people from anything, think about how much you’ve lost,” he said. “You might lose the next person who's going find a cure for cancer.”

He's so close to getting to a really good point there....

I should have just asked for a different midwife but I was too polite

I wonder how many of us reflect upon times when our politeness was a euphemism for an act of self-harm or condoned harm to others?

I had a male midwife. He told me to call him whenever I wanted to feed my baby so he could help. I never called him - it was too uncomfortable! So I struggled on my own and ended up giving up. I was so determined to do it and I feel like he kind of stole that from me. I should have just asked for a different midwife but I was too polite…