Thanks for this link Tania,
re the case - two thoughts
ONE - this is exactly why all midwives need to be
aware that they should have their own PI Insurance - because of the reality that
vicarious liability alone does not cover a midwife. Sadly - many midwives
still make the assumption that the PI Insurance issue is to be put in the
basket for IPM's to deal with, in the belief it is only their issue (how sad our
colleagues are not supported anyway! ) - but the truth is PI is an issue
that affects all midwives !
good to see Bisits calling it as it is and not
buying into the primary care stuff as RANZCOG recently did (it would be
delightful to be a fly on the wall right now). Of course Mourik's claim that
Ob's be responsible for the work of midwives is the response we would expect
when the issue not been faced is the OB been responisble for their own
work..which leads into point two.
TWO -
We all know obstetric beds are the highest
number of hospital beds used currently approx 250,000 per year.
And despite the OB's largely
turning birthing into big 'business' - with overservicing of well
women and less time available for the women who do need hrs of
intensive obstetric care - govts still provide the funds to keep it
happenning,
Women do not actually receive the care they
think they will when they choose an obstetrician for their care in both the
private and public health sector. we know the OB's do not
provide the care for a woman experiencing
labour and birth - it is the midwives who provide this care
with the OB glorified for catching the baby (if they actually make it in
time -and only if the woman has private health cover). Whilst
different OB's do have different practices, in the public health arena a woman
does not realise that even in an obstetric
emergency - caesarean section or emergency medical care - the Obstetrician
does not provide this. - women do
not realise it is provided by the team of midwives and drs/ob's
in training (residents and registrars) while the obstetricians who may
have seen the women for one or two brief periods in pregnancy and birth (15-30
mins ?) are drumming up big business (scans and genetic tests), often
imposed on healthy well young women at whim - who
again do not need to be overserviced with costly and unnessary tests. and we all
know only a small proportion of women receiving this care actually need it - and
the costs to women and the system are exorbitant.
Yet how do the govts address this ? - when the
insurance crisis hit the fed government bailed the OB's out to the
tune of $600 million and libs senator helen coonan secured coverage with
Llyods (London) ... the govt also provides access to
the high costs claim scheme (where if the Ob's PI insurance fee is more
than 7.5% of their income the govt pays the rest 80% AND will payout any
claim over $300,000 !) - not to mention the
coverage by medicare etc.
so why do govts continue to pay unnessary
medicalised birth costs and the 'patch up the damage funds' for other health
costs resulting from women recovering from traumatic birth experiences,
postnatal depression etc ? why do they keep plugging up the holes and
support a service that is essentially unnessary and expensive
medical sub standard care for the majority of women (80%
WHO) ?
Why do govts deny women the right to experience the
safest and most cost effective pregnancy and birth care ensuring the health
system 'dam' wall bursts while midwives do not have equity to
access medicare provider numbers or insurance ? ... yes abbott has stated he is now finally considering
medicare for midwives but only if a woman has been serviced by the public health
budget of a medicare swiped visit to the GP for a referral first !
despite all the evidence, unnessa'scary costs are
continuing to be paid out big time - for sub-standard care of healthy well
women experiencing pregnancy and birth. one does not need to look
much further than the individual and organisational donations at election
time and the politics of the obstetric alliance to work out why.
Sally-Anne
- Original Message -
From:
Tania
Smallwood
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, August 21, 2005 7:00
PM
Subject: [ozmidwifery] Liability ruling
in Weekend Australian
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,16318814%255E23289,00.html
Liability ruling delivers
fuel to midwife debateAdam Cresswell, health editorAugust 20, 2005
DOCTORS and midwives are at
loggerheads over their legal liabilities from new-style birthing units after a
hospital sued an obstetrician to recover a share of the $7.5million it was
ordered to pay for a birth mishap involving a
midwife.Obstetricians say the
case vindicates their fears they will be held responsible for the work of
midwives, who are pushing for expanded ro
