Re: [ozmidwifery] Article: Premmie Babies 'Bed Blocking'
One of our Canadian television stations did an expose program on this
subject a few years ago which I have on tape.
It was much like what Susan describes with her friend. Very often the
father leaves and the mom
and other children are on welfare with little social assistance for the
disabled child. If society can't help all the way, is it a kindness to
insist that parents do all that is possible to maintain a life.
I heard about a book written by an American ped who was brilliant at
saving the tiny babies. When he retired, he bought a motor home and
went in search of the children he had saved from a certain death. It
was not a happy experience for him. The stories were heartbreaking and
he had to rethink what his life's work had been about. I think a lot
of these errors in judgement come from doctors being so specialized and
not living in the community and seeing the results of their work.
Gloria in Canada.
Susan Cudlipp wrote:
I have to agree with both Gloria and
Nicole here. While the reporting of this sounds insensitive and many
premmies do just fine, the reality is that the extremely premature
babies do not have good outcomes, suffer an innordinate ammount of
painful procedures, and often end up with enormous long term
disabilities and suffering which has an impact on the whole family. I
have several friends with such children and their lives, while
precious, have been extremely hard, usually ending young. The parents
are left bereft but often relieved when it is finally all over. If
this offends some, I do not mean to - just telling you what I have seen
and experienced first hand.
The trouble is, of course that we do
not have a crystal ball to know which are going to do well and which
are not, but it horrifies me that so many very sick babies are kept
alive when nature would have decreed otherwise - "just because we can".
The cost factor is enormous and
unjustifiable, but the true cost is in the suffering of the child and
it's family. There is so much money used in keeping these tiny babies
alive, but then they are given back to their families who have to get
on with coping with the result, and believe me- there is precious
little funding or support to help with the cost of the next 15, 25, or
55 years.
I, for one, am quite pleased to hear
that medicine is questioning the wisdom of resuscitating extremely
premature infants - too much harm has already been done in the quest of
pushing the boundaries of medical science.
To quote one friend, a mother, who
wrote her story very eloquently:
"What happened to all the help given
to keep my son alive - modern up-to-date technology that saved his life
and kept him alive? . Once we were shown the door we were on our
own. No more grand technology - because it is wasted on people with a
disability - because there is no money, no money, no money"
This boy died at age 19, after a
life of total dependence for all his needs. He had been born at 24
weeks gestation.
Sue
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good
men to do nothing"
Edmund Burke
-
Original Message -
From:
Gloria
Lemay
To:
ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au
Sent:
Sunday, April 02, 2006 6:47 AM
Subject:
Re: [ozmidwifery] Article: Premmie Babies 'Bed Blocking'
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]]
Re: [ozmidwifery] Article: Premmie Babies 'Bed Blocking'
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 gestationare 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 Ob
RE: [ozmidwifery] Article: Premmie Babies 'Bed Blocking'
Hear
hear. Although not prem. baby took 40 mins to get a heart beat,
ventilated. Can't control his own temperature, swallow, etc. Needs 24
hr care. No awareness. No life. Maureen.
-Original Message-From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Susan
CudlippSent: Sunday, 2 April 2006 7:50 PMTo:
ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.auSubject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Article:
Premmie Babies 'Bed Blocking'
I have to agree with both Gloria and Nicole
here. While the reporting of this sounds insensitive and many premmies
do just fine, the reality is that the extremely premature babies do not have
good outcomes, suffer an innordinate ammount of painful procedures, and often
end up with enormous long term disabilities and suffering which has an impact
on the whole family. I have several friends with such children and
their lives, while precious, have been extremely hard, usually ending
young. The parents are left bereft but often relieved when it is finally
all over. If this offends some, I do not mean to - just telling you what
I have seen and experienced first hand.
The trouble is, of course that we do not have a
crystal ball to know which are going to do well and which are not, but it
horrifies me that so many very sick babies are kept alive when nature would
have decreed otherwise - "just because we can".
The cost factor is enormous and unjustifiable,
but the true cost is in the suffering of the child and it's family.
There is so much money used in keeping these tiny babies alive, but then they
are given back to their families who have to get on with coping with the
result, and believe me- there is precious little funding or support to help
with the cost of the next 15, 25, or 55 years.
I, for one, am quite pleased to hear that
medicine is questioning the wisdom of resuscitating extremely premature
infants - too much harm has already been done in the quest of pushing the
boundaries of medical science.
To quote one friend, a mother, who wrote her
story very eloquently:
"What happened to all the help given to
keep my son alive - modern up-to-date technology that saved his life
and kept him alive? . Once we were shown the door we were on our own.
No more grand technology - because it is wasted on people with a disability -
because there is no money, no money, no money"
This boy died at age 19, after a life of
total dependence for all his needs. He had been born at 24 weeks
gestation.
Sue
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do
nothing"Edmund Burke
- Original Message -
From:
Gloria
Lemay
To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au
Sent: Sunday, April 02, 2006 6:47
AM
Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Article:
Premmie Babies 'Bed Blocking'
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 @
BellyBellySent: Saturday, April 01, 2006 10:19
PMTo: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.auSubject:
[ozmidwifery] Article: Premmie Babies 'Bed
Blocking'
This was apparently on Sky
makes you sick to the stomach
Fury Over
Re: [ozmidwifery] Article: Premmie Babies 'Bed Blocking'
I have to agree with both Gloria and Nicole
here. While the reporting of this sounds insensitive and many premmies do
just fine, the reality is that the extremely premature babies do not have good
outcomes, suffer an innordinate ammount of painful procedures, and often end up
with enormous long term disabilities and suffering which has an impact on the
whole family. I have several friends with such children and their
lives, while precious, have been extremely hard, usually ending young. The
parents are left bereft but often relieved when it is finally all over. If
this offends some, I do not mean to - just telling you what I have seen and
experienced first hand.
The trouble is, of course that we do not have a
crystal ball to know which are going to do well and which are not, but it
horrifies me that so many very sick babies are kept alive when nature would have
decreed otherwise - "just because we can".
The cost factor is enormous and unjustifiable, but
the true cost is in the suffering of the child and it's family. There is
so much money used in keeping these tiny babies alive, but then they are given
back to their families who have to get on with coping with the result, and
believe me- there is precious little funding or support to help with the cost of
the next 15, 25, or 55 years.
I, for one, am quite pleased to hear that medicine
is questioning the wisdom of resuscitating extremely premature infants - too
much harm has already been done in the quest of pushing the boundaries of
medical science.
To quote one friend, a mother, who wrote her story
very eloquently:
"What happened to all the help given to
keep my son alive - modern up-to-date technology that saved his life
and kept him alive? . Once we were shown the door we were on our own.
No more grand technology - because it is wasted on people with a disability -
because there is no money, no money, no money"
This boy died at age 19, after a life of total
dependence for all his needs. He had been born at 24 weeks
gestation.
Sue
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do
nothing"Edmund Burke
- Original Message -
From:
Gloria Lemay
To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au
Sent: Sunday, April 02, 2006 6:47
AM
Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Article:
Premmie Babies 'Bed Blocking'
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 @
BellyBellySent: Saturday, April 01, 2006 10:19 PMTo:
ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.auSubject: [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
Re: [ozmidwifery] Article: Premmie Babies 'Bed Blocking'
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 @
BellyBellySent: Saturday, April 01, 2006 10:19 PMTo:
ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.auSubject: [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
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 @ BellyBellySent: Saturday, April 01, 2006 10:19 PMTo: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.auSubject: [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 "hear
[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 professio
