To think the WEP should not be campaigning for men to be allowed to stay overnight on postnatal wards?

[CallaLilli]

I was just having a look at some of the objectives for the WEP and noticed they have a Stand Up for Dads campaign. Now whilst I agree with a lot of what they say on that page, one of the things they say is:

“hospitals don’t seem to take dads seriously. Many treat new fathers and new co-parents as visitors who have to stick to visiting hours or at best sleep in a chair. All new mums should be allowed a partner with them 24-7 if they choose.”

Countless women on MN have spoken of their experiences on postnatal wards and the majority of them have said that they would not want men staying on the ward 24/7, at a time when they feel at their most vulnerable. Am I BU to think that a party set up for women should be more considerate of what women want?

For the survey.

Can people give the time they were in hospital after giving birth, whether there were complications, whether they had to be consultant/midwife-led and whether they are for and against men sleeping over?

DC1 - long labour, epidural, episiotomy, stayed 2 nights
DC2 - long labour, epidural, episiotomy, stayed 1 night
DC3 - longest labour in the world. Abused over a period of hours by someone else make visitor while in labour. Laboured in corridor to get away from him. Discharged myself against medical advice to avoid returning to ward.
DC4 - emcs. Baby is scbu for 6 days. I stayed 8 days - with baby on postnatal for final 2. Numerous stays on paeds since - not the same at all

I am against Dad's staying overnight.

I'm also against female partners or friends staying over due to space and noise.

But it is s legitimate question of how do you accommodate those that want or need help from their partner without causing issue from those who don't want men around

"Wanting" your partner isn't a need that should be accommodated.

"Needing" your partner suggests there is not enough staff to attend to basic needs of recovering new mothers.

What should be done is that there should be more private rooms and more trained midwives and more funding for the increased needs of maternity services.

What I see actually happening in future is that the NHS will hear a couple of women saying they want their husbands with them overnight, which they then allow as a blanket policy, thus funding fewer staff because partners can bring drinks/pass a baby/ change a bum etc.

Also many women will opt for home births due to the lack of privacy in hospitals. Thus the NHS needs even less money. and so on and so on.

NHS maternity funding is already on its knees. Allowing visitors overnight is a shockingly bad idea with long term consequences.

ohbehave, are you suggesting postnatal women are likely to smoke and drink at the same rate as the men??

I doubt any of the new mothers are spending the evening in the pub and then coming onto the ward stinking of beer - as some of the fathers have been reported doing.

Sure, as a patient, we cannot choose who we are next to in the ward - but we sure as hell can banish non-patients at night, for the good of everyone on the ward recovering from childbirth.

Until a load of money is invested into postnatal wards which seems highly unlikely to happen anytime soon, it seems sensible that where possible a visitor helps overnight where the mother has had complications and needs regular help to lessen the load on overstretched NHS staff and improve the quality of care for the mother and newborn. Obviously preferable would be private rooms and more staff as standard but this isn't going to happen anytime soon, we are at least waiting till the next general election. In the mean time new mothers with complications need help out of visiting hours and should be able to get it either from a visitor or NHS staff. Theres privacy and dignity and then there is basic, fundamental care - obviously both are very important but providing basic care where there are complications in the context of an overall lack of staff and resources, must take priority.

Missbattleaxe. Are you saying it should NEVER be allowed? Or that exceptional circumstances should be taken into consideration?

Ohbehave the question of obnoxious/dangerous female patients has been dealt with upthread. Yes, some of the women who have just given birth will be dangerous, have smuggled alcohol in, obnoxious etc. However, these women are the patients. They have to be there. The men don't. Additionally, they'll have just given birth so whatever way you want to slice it, they'll pose less of a physical risk than someone who'd otherwise be equally dangerous who hasn't. Basically, whatever threat some of you feel a post EMCS woman or indeed baby poses to you, there isn't really any choice but for them to be in the hospital. Whereas there is a choice about adding extra non-patients to the mix.

Underthegreenwoodtree. All you have to do is look at the number of post natal woman standing outside the department because they can finally smoke. Last time I was there it was constant.

So fanny. I will ask you the same as missbattleaxe. Are you saying never, or that exceptional circumstances should allow.

I meant I have seen relatives stay overnight on a non maternity ward. But only on very rare occasions. My mother was allowed to sty overnight when her mother was dying. I was on a ward where a man was allowed to stay overnight when his wife who was disabled was admitted. He was afraid she wouldn't get the care she needed. He only stayed one night though, as the care was actually very good.

Like I said, ohbehave - there's not a lot you can do when it's a fellow patient (although I didn't come across a single postnatal woman smoking when I gave birth) - but you can banish the non-patients overnight. The non-patients who are far more likely to be ones smoking/drinking.

I suppose you'll tell me next that postnatal women also disappear down the pub and come back to the ward stinking of beer?

You're very bad at reading my posts ohbehave! I have said more than once that I think there are circumstances where there's a clinical need for partners to stay, such as severe MH issues. These are the deserving cases who should get the private rooms, without having to pay extra since it's a part of their care.

Under. No. But I have seen one polish off half a bottle of JD that her partner brought in .........

The WEP should be campaigning for more staff in maternity wards.

'On the NICU both parents are allowed to visit 24/7. Where is the difference?'

They don't get to sleep there. When my DD was in ICU we had to sit in a hard chair.

For survey:
DD1 - she was OP with her hand up cupping her head so epidural and forceps. In for 5 days. Own room. DH went home at night.
DD2 - quick birth so discharged from delivery after 6 hours.
DS - CLU due to high blood pressure. Epidural, drugs for blood pressure, ventouse delivery. In for 2 nights.

Totally against having visitors there overnight in wards. Any of them.

My DH stayed overnight with both my L&Ds, but we had an NHS private room with an ensuite. My case is kinda different through because both my pregnancies ended in pre-term labour and stillbirth.

That said, in my first pregnancy, I spent a lot of time on a small 4-bed antenatal ward where I witnessed another pregnant woman's waters break in the middle of the ward as she was trying to go to the loo.

One of the other women on the ward had a lot of family (five adults, three male, two female, and three small children) around her bed when this happened. They just stared at the poor woman. It was completely inappropriate. I felt mortified for her.

Not only that, but the room was so crowded, the midwives couldn't move around efficiently to help her. I couldn't help thinking that forty years ago, the midwives would have cleared the room of visitors as soon as the woman's waters broke -- and I wondered why they do not do that now.

Worksallhourz. So sorry to hear of what you had to go through. I know how difficult it was with my twins and the issues that one of them had so I can only imagine how it must have been.

Expatinscotland. There are always exceptional cases - to say any of them shows total lack of compassion or empathy

Apologies expat. My eyesight is getting worse. I missed the in wards bit.

Again, it is NOT simple to have separate wards for women-with-partners and women-without. The midwives are already trying to match clinical case mix to staffing when they allocate beds - it's not just random! - and the most important thing is to ensure that you have enough of the right staff in the right wards for the clinical needs of the women there. Often that is trumped by pure swamping - too few beds - but as much as possible that is done. Adding in another criteria - do the women want their partners to stay - would be a complete nightmare for the staff struggling to get the right bed mix. Can people please stop saying this like it's an easy thing to pull off, and just think for a minute about what is involved?

And, quite obviously, you need surplus beds to be able to offer choice. I can't believe there are many hospitals where there is a surplus of maternity beds.

It was made clear to me when I asked for a private room that even though I was paying for it, if another patient had a clinical need for a private room I would have to vacate. I thought this was fair enough.

One more. Would they have refunded you if someone needed the room.

It didn't arise, but I expect so as I was billed at the end for the number of nights used. It was flagged to me as a risk (ie I might have to move at any time) which wouldn't have been a risk on the ward

If a woman who wanted no partners present needed to be accommodated on the "partners" ward, would you be happy that all partners were immediately required to go home?

Onemore. I think it is the only way it could work. But I also think that things could be done to facilitate partners staying where necessary. I think that this thread is too no at all costs - although I may be reading it wrong.