to wonder why the UK is so far behind with ante-natal care?

[hairbrushbedhair]

Just that really. The UK doesn't seem to test or worry about things that other countries take more seriously. I know we have a NHS and it's down to cost probably, so it's likely I am BU

Those descriptions of NHS massive wards with tons of random strangers and grumpy midwives sound like something from Soviet Russia.
I had DD in Switzerland and was similar to what skiptonlass wrote about Sweden. One-to-one, lovely midwife. Pools, homeopathy and essential oils if you wanted, or epidural arriving at the first request - no 'oh you don't need it' nonsense. No 'don't be silly, we know better' attitude whatsoever. Either private or double rooms, with separate area for guests. It was fabulous.

Katharina It is like that at the hospital where I delivered here in the US (if you don't have complications like bloody preeclampsia).

They do look at the whole picture for preeclampsia in the UK - a friend was diagnosed because she kept getting headaches and swollen feet and I remember looking up what to do when I was seeing spots (this is a sign too). Luckily it was nothing but I was given information about it.

The point about refusing GBS testing is that it can give false positives which can lead to babies being given unnecessary antibiotics and restrictions on birth which may be unnecessary and carry risks of their own. Testing in labour is the best but we don't have the technology to do this fast enough yet. evidencebasedbirth.com/groupbstrep/

BertieBotts unnecessary antibiotics and restricted births doesn't kill anyone though? I understand it's annoying if your birth is restricted unnecessarily but wouldn't you rather be safe than sorry?

My epidural never turned up and the mw comments of didnt you do well were really not appreciated (a lot of biting my tongue)
I think they could offer to weigh you.
I gained like 31lb or more. But was back in my clothes in weeks and only about 4lb heavier at 3m.
Nhs just seems to ignore NICE.
So its pot luck.
If people want home birth, or water fine.
But pain relief should also be a choice you make not them who try to save money.
Im not concerned about seeing same person all the time, its not practical. But by not meeting mw before leaves you open to being treated badly, its not like they have to impress customers. Seems to be no feedback unless you want to make a complaint.
Most people dont want to stay in hospital after. I mainly just found again disorganisation, so no telling you to fill in meal plan. Keep reminding about medicines.
This time i waited over 16hrs for a new baby check. 5am -9pm. Kept hanging around. Oh ive reminded them. Theyll try..
Oh they said they cant too busy.
Dp loitering around and parents waiting around with toddler.
I cried when i passed a huge clot after a few days. Worried it would be more waiting around. Luckily only took about 3hrs.

Switzerland has much worse rates though of neo natal death and stillborn babies. Sweden though has great outcomes. But people there are willing to pay much higher taxes to have a great welfare state.

Yes its not the cost of testing everyone for gbs. Its what to do if they have it. Didnt pp say like 30% well theres no way they will bring all those in as soon as they get a contraction to start the AB. They want people to labour at home as long as possible to save on mw and rooms etc so they have space when needed.
Though i guess they would be put on a ward?

They want people to labour at home as long as possible to save on mw and rooms etc so they have space when needed.

That's the problem. A family friend kept getting told to stay at home because "you can't be in real labour yet", she ignored them and went to hospital and was 8cm. She'd have had the baby at home if she'd have listened to them.

Money saving above care

Naty That is the problem. They should do the test so they get better at knowing roughly how many women are affected. They should do the test and provide the necessary care once in labour.

There is an issue with the planning process with the NHS. I get the impression they should be planning for the worst, not averages. There flexible wards at the hospital where I delivered that are empty during the summer months and full during the winter. This isn't inefficient at all. They had capacity to manage all the births nine months after superstorm sandy with no issues and can manage the increase in sickness of the elderly during the winter months.

Bertie It was the weight gain that first triggered them to start monitoring me more closely. I first had huge weight gain over two fortnight periods followed by other symptoms that lead to a diagnosis and treatment for preeclampsia. They were looking for issues with preeclampsia as well as GD. Also, my second test for GBS was done at the hospital and the results were available shortly after. For my 2nd I had the tests done on the Saturday morning and I had my CS on Monday morning but they gave me another test on the Monday morning because the first came back as inconclusive. The results were back quickly because they took samples at 7am and DS was born at 9:11am.

I have given birth in London, Switzerland and Germany. Anecdotal, but can say my experience, which was birth in London - absolutely horrific. Esp post natal ward. Truly horrific.

Switzerland in comparison brilliant.

Germany best of the 3.

Mind you, By the time I got to Germany and dc4 I was VERY clear about what I wanted and what I was prepared to tolerate, so was v. good.

Where are you getting that data from Cleaty? The study I saw showed the uk had more stillbirths

Gin and Bertie
Research just published by the North West Healthcare NHS Trust found an 80 percent drop in the number of babies developing Group Strep B when pregnant women were screened. That's too significant to ignore, for the sake of having a home birth or avoiding antibiotics in pregnancy, and the test costs nothing to perform.

We fetishize natural births and 'unnecessary' testing in pregnancy to an unhealthy degree here in the UK. All encouraged by the NHS because it saves money. I have friends in France and Sweden who cannot believe what women put up with in terms of their ante-natal care and labour in the UK. We think the NHS is the envy of the world. It really isn't.

The NHS can do great things but it makes my blood boil when I hear 'The NHS offers the best care when you consider the cost of care provided.' That does not sit well with me. I think childbirth is an area where the NHS needs to really improve.

What is shocking is that there was another poster from Canada who shared the cost of their child being born and it was extremely close to the cost of my DC being delivered here in the US, in Northern NJ which has some of the highest medical costs in the US. The difference was less than $1000.

Rather than cutting benefits and healthcare we should be looking to cut our expenses. Just think of the amounts saved in housing benefit if house prices fell back in line with earnings. The current salary levels might well be sustainable. I also think we need to adjust our expectation of the NHS being free at the point of use. Healthcare is extremely expensive and if we want the best we need to pay for it. I don't see why everyone who pays for scripts pays the same to see the doctor. It would be quite simple to administer.

When I was pregnant in 2009 the NHS only done one scan at 12 weeks and that was it (maybe a regional thing?). I actually paid for a private scan at 24 weeks as I felt that it was a very long time from 12 to 40 weeks and a lot could change in that time.

I believe they have started up the 20 week scans again so obviously they have decided it wasn't worth skipping it after all.

I think the midwife led births, pain relief, water birth availability and home birth availability in the UK is a great thing in comparison to many other places. I do feel the aftercare in hospital is poor (mainly due to staff shortages rather than the staff themselves). I also think we should test for more things than we do and not just those who are deemed high risk. I think a large chunk of the pre natal care budget is spent hammering on the point of 'breast is best'. I recieved an entire tree worth of leaflets and booklets on Brest feeding - all of which said the same things over and over and 3 hours classes on the right way to hold a plastic doll onto a knitted boob (I kid you not) Not that I disagree with breast feeding but the vast funding spent on this type of nonsense (ie the knitted boob thing) would be better spent on additional tests or scans or even perhaps breast feeding support groups once you have an actual baby to feed.

I got it from WHO on the internet.

according to WHO, UK stillbirth rate in 2009 was 4, Switzerland 3, and neonatal mortality in 2011 3 for both, so I would not call that much worse. www.who.int/gho/publications/world_health_statistics/EN_WHS2013_Full.pdf

In relative terms, 4 is much greater than 3. That's one extra stillbirth per 1,000 births. There are about 700,000 births each year in the UK so that's 700 extra stillbirths each year compared to Switzerland.

And many developed countries have a stillbirth rate of 2. So the UK has DOUBLE the rate of countries like Singapore, Finland, Norway, Denmark and Germany. If the NHS is the supposed envy of the world then surely the stillbirth rate should be up there with the best performing countries.

exactly, so a comment claiming 'Switzerland has much worse rates though of neo natal death and stillborn babies' is not quite correct.