Active discussions

Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Childbirth

Share experiences and get support around labour, birth and recovery.

Original poster

The death of independent midwifery?

161 replies

Snaf · 08/02/2007 19:05

May I draw your attention to this?

I am a fervent supporter of the NHS and the struggle of NHS midwives to provide good care and support everyday, but I also feel very strongly that alternatives should be available to those that want/need them. This proposal is yet another nail in the coffin of maternal choice.

If this legislation goes ahead, it will effectively mean the end of independent midwifery. I know that lots of MNers have had great experiences with IMs and I'm sure the IMA would appreciate your support if you (and anyone else!) would like to lend it.

OP posts:
Are your children’s vaccines up to date?
Set a reminder
Original poster
Snaf · 08/02/2007 19:50

I'm sure some of you give a toss...

OP posts:
harpsichordcarrier · 08/02/2007 19:52

oh I was going to start a thread on this Snafu. It's awful isn't it? really really appalling. I read it in PM today.
what is the NCT doing, do you know??

lulumama · 08/02/2007 19:55

god, what a disaster....how awful ! have bookmarked the link..what can we do?

Jimjams2 · 08/02/2007 19:57

gosh there's quite a lot of dodgy stuff going on in there isn't there. Why did the RCM withdraw in 1994?

harpsichordcarrier · 08/02/2007 20:03

I don't know the answer to that Jimjams but that seems to me to be the obvious solution. cost reasons? I have no idea why the RCM wouldn't protect all midwives

NorksBride · 08/02/2007 20:07

Having only read the link and not having any previous knowledge of this subject, my initial thoughts would be to lobby for affordable insurance rather than rail against the legislation.

I'm musing, that if you use an independent midwife who makes mistakes during a pregnancy and/or birth which resulted in harm to mother or baby, how would the parents seek the same financial security to provide care that patients under the NHS would get?

I only look after clients computer software and I'm insured up to my teeth.

Original poster
Snaf · 08/02/2007 20:09

I don't really know, jimjams - too expensive, probably. I can find nothing on the RCM site about this, but that's no great surprise.

What really pisses me off is that the IMA community midwifery model (was tied in with the One Mother One Midwife campaign if anyone remembers it) has been stamped on too.

"If independent midwifery care is no longer available, a small but growing proportion of women will choose to give birth alone, which is the most dangerous option of all." You only have to look at some MN threads to see how this could become a reality. Women are desperate for alternatives to conveyor-belt midwifery care (midwives are too!) and whilst I think no woman should have to pay for good care, at least the option is out there.

I am so despondent about midwifery services right now. And then we have that silly tart in the Times ?today writing about how shit midwives are and how you're only safe with a doctor... It's all grist to the mill fo those who want to destroy midwifery and midwives.

OP posts:
norkmaiden · 08/02/2007 20:10

Thanks for the link. I can't get my head round the utter crapness of maternity provision in this country, and IM seem to be a last resort for women who want (to plan for at least) the birth of their choice. Midwives trained and unable to find work despite the staffing shortages, home births refused because of short-staffed hospital units, and now this stealth imposition of medicalised birth - it's a disgrace.

harpsichordcarrier · 08/02/2007 20:14

so the first article in practising midwife is the end of independent midwifery.

and then on the next page - two thirds of maternity units understaffed.

how would lobbying for affordable insurance work? I mean, given the nature of insruance companies?

Original poster
Snaf · 08/02/2007 20:18

NB, they wouldn't be able to seek compensation, that's the point. And that's not fair. Clients should be protected, by all means. IMs currently have to declare that they practise uninsured and that understanding is part of the contract between an IM and the client.

Of course affordable insurance is the key. No IM wants to practise uninsured. But the powers-that-be see it as easier to just get rid of IMs altogether rather than deal with the issue of why PII is so astronomically expensive.

OP posts:
NorksBride · 08/02/2007 20:19

What is the insurance cost if you're an employer? If it's less than the £15k per year per midwife quoted earlier in this thread, then independent midwives could set themselves up as companies, instead of being self-employed, and get insurance that way. There may be IR35 issues but these can generally be overcome.

How many independent midwives are there? If there is a substantial number and ALL of them have to be insured, you may find insurance companies are a little more flexible on the cost.

norkmaiden · 08/02/2007 20:21

I think the link said c. 200 NB

NorksBride · 08/02/2007 20:32

200 indep. midwives wouldn't be enough to attract the insurance industry's interest, unfortunately.

Can't the IMA provide overall membership insurance in the same way that the RCN and RCM do?

WideWebWitch · 08/02/2007 20:37

Grr, pressed post and it disappeared
what do we do?
Agree, this wouold be awful

lulumama · 08/02/2007 20:43

the idea we have a choice about birth and how we birth is being eroded all around us...shocking....

MummyPossum · 08/02/2007 20:47

Message withdrawn

BrummieOnTheRun · 09/02/2007 14:36

I've just read this and my jaw hit the floor! At a time when there's a staffing crisis in many maternity units that leaves women dangerously unattended, they're going to risk cutting the only option available for women who want to guarantee that they get 1-to-1 support and monitoring during labour and birth, or want to guarantee a M/W can attend their homebirth?

When the NHS can afford to actually hire the M/Ws it has trained and thereby improve the level of maternity care through the NHS, THEN they can look at reforms to private maternity care.

Will watch with interest to see if they get insurers on board as part of the package, but suspect that without considerable pressure from all interested parties this will be another example of destructive ( rather than constructive) legislation where closing loopholes becomes more important than care for women.

crimplene · 09/02/2007 17:11

Unassisted births are already happening. I know two women who've given birth without professional help because the NHS won't agree to provide the care they want and they haven't been able to afford/ get an IM in their area.

I was a bit shocked that IMs don't have insurance when I engaged one, and then I thought about it and realised that makes them all the more brave IMO as they stand to lose everything (house/ livlihood/ the lot) if a client does sue successfully.

Calliope · 09/02/2007 17:21

No! I am TTC at the moment and planning to use an IM if/when I get pregnant because I had such a hideous experience on the NHS production line last time round.

This is appalling. Thanks for posting the link Snaf - I will definitely be following this with great interest.

rachelhill · 11/02/2007 21:04

This is bloody outrageous. What PRACTICALLY can we do here? I'll email my MP but he's a bit of a useless so and so so not sure how much that'll help.

I have had such a traumatic birth experience I'm now phobic of going into hospitals - I physically can't enter them without being sick - and I doubt the local midwifery team will want to have anything to do with me as I had a section last time and the local midwife unit 'isn't allowed' to take anyone who is attempting a VBAC. I know the NHS is legally obliged to provide someone, but someone who won't pooh-pooh your requests isn't mandatory apparently!

So an IM to my mind is my only option.

Either that or I'll be buying a LOT of obstetric books on amazon and having an unassisted labour myself!

I thought we stopped burning midwives as witches a few centuries ago, are we go to back to the dark days of hiding to give birth with secret helpers?

Madness, pure madness

Spidermama · 11/02/2007 21:08

They've been talking about this for years. Terrible isn't it?

I'm going to write to my IMWs and find out if there's anything I can do. I'll report back if there is.

Spidermama · 11/02/2007 21:16

Same here btw mummypossum . I would far rather go it alone than have a hospital birth or even have overstretched NHS midwives provide my 'care'. No offence to any NHS pros out there.

harpsichordcarrier · 11/02/2007 21:18

there will be more unassisted births for sure.

totallyfloaty35 · 11/02/2007 21:34

Cant believe what im reading,without my IM ,would never had got the birth i wanted,it was bad enough that i ended up in hospital and she was not allowed to deliver me,but without her actually standing behind hospital staff and shaking her head when they tried to force me into a c-section or physically blocking the door and distracting hospital staff so i had a chance to dilate i would have been wheeled off to the operating theatre for sure.
There is a shortage of MW,why make it harder for women to get the care they deserve

edam · 11/02/2007 21:37

I think the government is either unconcerned or even pleased at the threat to independent midwifery. When I interviewed a previous health minister in charge of maternity services (Stephen Ladyman) he made it clear that the DH view was that midwife-led units were merely something middle class women were hung up about and independent midwifery was so far down the scale it barely registered. Haven't seen anything to make me think this has changed.

DH attitude to maternity services is 'we can get away with starving them of resources as women won't complain'. And they are, by and large, right (that they can get away with it) - cheaper to settle a small number of legal cases where births go very badly wrong, even with awards running into seven figures, than to provide decent care for every woman.