Re: [ozmidwifery] Article: Premmie Babies 'Bed Blocking'

[sally tracy]

Dear  list, there is no excuse for the use of insensitive and offensive language for example the use of the word 'bed blocking'. The production line language is in  common parlance unfortunately...... I recommend the recent paper by Denis Walsh published in the journal Social Science & Medicine 62 (2006) 1330–1340 , "Subverting the assembly-line: Childbirth in a free-standing birth centre". I also think that the discussion needs to focus more on the practice of RCOG and other professional groups who need to re-examine the advice they give women regarding elective caesarean section. I'm sure our research will show that the rise in the rate of admission of babies who are 'drugged' at birth and plucked from their mothers via CS and also those who are born by CS too early  - i.e. younger than 39 completed weeks gestation........are the real reason why so many intensive beds are taken up  - often these babies are admitted for 24 hours or longer  - sometimes even on ventilators if the RDS is bad enough,........and both these circumstances are easily preventable!!!. ST Gloria Lemay wrote: Wise words, Nicole.  We all have to look at the reality of medical costs that are skyrocketing and never-ending technology that we can buy but can't afford.  Gloria in Canada ----- Original Message ----- From: Nicole Carver To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2006 3:03 PM Subject: RE: [ozmidwifery] Article: Premmie Babies 'Bed Blocking' How sad. A more valid point to discuss is the suffering that some of these babies go through, which should be weighed against chance of survival and later quality of life. There is a lot that is done to these babies to keep them alive, that must must be incredibly painful and distressing. Good palliative care for some, would be far kinder in their brief lives than intercostal tubes, arterial lines, ventilation, gastric tubes, tape all over their face which pulls off their skin when changed, noisy, scary environments etc.   However, what a heart rending decision to make. I am greatful for my three healthy children, born vaginally at term. No miscarriages or even any scares. How precious life is.   Perhaps there should be more done in the prevention of prematurity, such as reducing the stress of pregnant women in lower socio-economic groups by running support groups and providing one to one midwifery care, and more intervention to help women stop smoking.   Nicole. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Kelly @ BellyBelly Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2006 10:19 PM To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Subject: [ozmidwifery] Article: Premmie Babies 'Bed Blocking' This was apparently on Sky… makes you sick to the stomach…   Fury Over Baby Comments Updated: 14:38, Monday March 27, 2006 Doctors have provoked controversy by suggesting premature babies should not always be treated because they are "bed blocking". They said that in some cases, premature babies born under 25 weeks should be allowed to die. The Royal College Of Obstetricians And Gynaecologists said space in neo-natal units was often in short supply. They said this was the result of "bed-blocking" by very sick premature babies. The Royal College said such beds could be better used to treat babies with a higher chance of survival than sick premature ones. Professor Sir Alan Craft, of the Royal College of Paediatrics, said: "Many paediatricians would be in favour of adopting the Dutch model of no active intervention for these very little babies. "The vast majority of children born at this gestation who do survive have significant disabilities. "There is a lifetime cost and that needs to be taken into the equation when society tries to decide whether it wants to intervene." However, premature babies charity Bliss described the idea as a "gross abuse of human rights". Chief executive Rob Williams said: "We might as well have a policy of not treating victims of car crashes which occur at over 50 miles an hour, or denying medical services to those over a certain age."   __________________________   Then this:   Premature babies are blocking beds, says royal medical college By Amy Iggulden (Filed: 27/03/2006) Premature babies who need months of expensive care have been accused of "bed blocking" by one of Britain's royal medical colleges, it emerged yesterday. Sarah and James Cummings Sara Cummings and her son James, now a healthy five-year-old, who was born at just 24 weeks In a consultation document, the Royal College of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (RCOG) said that very premature babies were taking up intensive care space that could be used for healthier babies. The high demand from premature births means that some expectant mothers with potentially healthier babies are forced into other hospitals at a late stage, it said. Premature baby campaigners and mothers attacked the language used as "insensitive" and "a disgrace". In a report to the Nuffield Council on Bioethics, which is running a two-year inquiry into prolonging life in premature babies, the RCOG said: "Some weight should be given to economic considerations as there is a real issue in neo-natal units of "bed blocking"; whereby women have to be transferred in labour to other units, compromising both their and their babies' care." In the July 2005 report, it added: "One of the problems of the "success" of neo-natal intensive care is that the practitioners are always pushing the boundaries. "There has been a constant need to expand numbers of cots to cover the increasing tendency to try and rescue babies at lower and lower gestations." A spokesman for Bliss, the premature baby charity, criticised the RCOG for insensitive and "unhelpful" language. "The care of premature babies is already an area that is under-resourced and overstretched, and it is not helpful to suggest that their worth can be calculated in terms of money," she said. Kelly Sowerby, 29, from Tyne and Wear, Sunderland, who has had three premature babies - one at almost 23 weeks - who did not survive, said it was a "heartless disgrace" to suggest that premature babies were "bed blocking". "Even if the odds were tiny I wanted to fight for my son to have a single chance of life," she said. The RCOG statement reflects growing opinion among doctors and specialists towards the withholding of treatment from babies born under 25 weeks. Baroness Warnock, the leading medical ethics expert, has said that Britain should follow the example of Holland, the only European country that says such babies should die. She believes that it would prevent doctors from competing to keep alive babies that may not survive in the long-term. The UK has the highest rate of low birth weight babies in western Europe. About 800 babies are born each year under 25 weeks but medical advances suggest that almost 40 per cent of them can survive. At 23 weeks - 17 weeks premature - only 11 per cent survive free of a disabling condition, according to a report by EPICure, at Nottingham University. A neo-natal intensive care bed costs about £1,000 a day and very premature babies can require round-the-clock help for many months. Research by the Rowntree Foundation suggests that it costs three times as much to bring up a child with a severe disability (about £125,000) than a child without problems. The Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (RCPCH) is expected to hear at its conference this week that babies born under 25 weeks could cost three times as much to educate by the age of six. A spokesman for the RCOG said yesterday: "There is a proper professional concern around the death and handicap rate in babies born under 25 weeks."   Best Regards, Kelly Zantey Creator, BellyBelly.com.au Gentle Solutions From Conception to Parenthood BellyBelly Birth Support - http://www.bellybelly.com.au/birth-support