I would go for either, salary based on # of women cared for per year or per month or contract, but I think there should be an upper limit on the number of women a midwife can take on. And, I hate to say this but maybe for those of us newly qualified (if we are eligible for positions??) there should be a minimum number of clients we care for in a year. I would leave this up to others more experienced than myself to determine this though. The only thing I wouldn't like would be an hourly contract, I think the time we spend with women should be at our and their discretion. I must say I like the idea of being employed as a community midwife rather than running my own business, it is just a personality thing I think. Maybe a questionaire would be helpful, it will be really tedious reaading all of our replies AND making sense of them.
marilyn ----- Original Message ----- From: "Denise Hynd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 4:56 AM Subject: [ozmidwifery] SalariedVersusContract > Dear Ozmid list, > I would like some feedback,ideas /discussion about how supporters of NMAP > and others, see the prospect of MIPP's being contracted to government to > provide homebirth services compared to being salaried? > > Also should either or both of the above options be arranged, managed via > the health dept (central) or local area health services?? > > What is the favoured option?? > > How else could it be done so there is PI cover for MIPPs in Aust? > > I have my own ideas and responses to these proposals but as I say i would > appreciate some idea of other concerned consumers and midwives responses, > perceptions of these prospects? > Thank you > Denise Hynd( > > -- > This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics. > Visit <http://www.acegraphics.com.au> to subscribe or unsubscribe. > -- This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics. Visit <http://www.acegraphics.com.au> to subscribe or unsubscribe.
