Hi Sadie, Yes it was a generalised comment and a bit vague.
The rates for medical intervention (inductions, ARM, augmentation, pethidine, nitrous oxide) are all very similar in the UK as they are in Australia, as are forceps, ventous, episiotomy and caesarean. Given that most women giving birth in the UK are cared for through the NHS and that their primary care giver will be a midwife, these high rates of interventions suggest to me that midwives are responsible for a lot of unnecessary intervention.
We know from Sally Tracy's work on Australia that our rates of interventions are largely driven by the high private obstetric component, which is not an issue in the UK. Therefore, it seems to me that midwives in the UK are still being controlled by obstetrics (even if at arm's length through the doctor's control of bodies such as NICE)
I have met very few midwives (fingers of one hand???) in the UK that feel comfortable with the idea of facilitating a birth without any drugs whatsoever - even at home births and for water births Entonox is freely used, for example. There is a different culture operating in Britain - one where women (pregnant and care givers) feel that women can't labour without "a little something". I find it all very interesting and rather depressing.
I wrote something about this in my latest Diary entry: http://www.birthinternational.com/diary/index.html
Midwifery is under a lot of stress everywhere and clearly in danger of being suborned by the medical model unless we are very careful.
Regards, Andrea At 01:47 AM 7/07/2006, you wrote:
Andrea How do you define midwifery care for the UK? As someone who had all her children in the UK within the NHS where I was cared for by a midwife (except in one instance where I needed intrauterine surgery and was therefore cared for by an OB), I could not compare the over-servicing of women here in OZ, compared to that provide in the UK. I wasn't quite sure what the stats you quoted were meant to imply. The UK is far from perfect but I do believe that the choices for women in the UK are better that currently available her (in WA anyway). Debbie Slater Perth, WA -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andrea Robertson Sent: Thursday, 6 July 2006 10:15 PM To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] NZ stats Hi Pauline, As I understand it, those that don't go to a midwife end up with a doctor (usually an obstetrician) and the NZ caesarean rate is over 20%. It looks like you have either either a midwife or a caesarean in NZ. Simple choice! Regards Andrea currently in the UK where 68% of women have midwifery care and almost all the rest have a caesarean section (the UK current stats are very similar to OZ, and yet they only have 3% private obstetric care compared to almost 40% in OZ. ?????). At 11:31 PM 6/07/2006, you wrote: >I'm a mid student and a kiwi. At present in NZ 78% of women choose >a midwife as their lead maternity carer. It's nice to know that it >is possible, when the choice is there. > >Pauline Moore >WA -- 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.
-- This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics. Visit <http://www.acegraphics.com.au> to subscribe or unsubscribe.
