Dear Joy,
Replying to what I perceived as a question about how homebirths stats are
collected on the state system. Our Midwives Notification Form has recently
(about the last year) put in a new box to be coded for "intended place of
birth" and therefore will be able to pick up whether a woman is transferred
from home, intended to birth in hospital/ birth centre and then stayed at
home. It should be interesting after a few years.
regards, Mary Murphy
----- Original Message -----
From: Johnston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: ozmidwifery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 1999 9:19 AM
Subject: RE: senate inquiry
> Here's my hand up - Yes, we do all need to work on this one.
> Sally wrote;
> <i agree it would be very good for ozmidwifery to submit a response to th=
> e
> inquiry, and I am happy to co-ordinate responses on behalf of ozmid.
> Everybody's contribution would have to reach me by the 3rd August and I
> will put them together. Doesn't matter how small the offfering is......it
> all counts...just remember to reference work submitted>
>
> I (JJ) am preparing a submission with the Executive of ACMI Vic Branch, a=
> nd
> it will be quite comprehensive. A lot of what we have prepared for the
> recent round of State reviews under the Competition Policy Agreement also
> applies to this inquiry.
> The notes to assist in the preparation of submissions tell us that the
> submission:
> may be a letter, or a substantial paper
> may contain facts, opinions, arguments and recommendations.
> may cover all points raised by the committee, or selected ones.
> where possible should be typed on A4 paper. If written, should be
> legible (!)
> If there are parts of a submission that the author would prefer not b=
> e
> made public, this can be kept confidential, and there are protections of
> parliamentary privilege. (If you need this I suggest you check details)
> authors may be asked to give oral evidence before a committee.
> A couple of points that someone may be able to shed light on:
> (i) the adequacy of information provided to expectant mothers and their
> families in relation to the choices for safe practice available to them; =
> and
> Is there anyone out there (esp consumers) who has tried to get informatio=
> n?
> A letter about this would be very useful. Anyone in Vic can send it to m=
> e.
> I understand that it's easier to get info from the NSW Midwives Data
> Collection than it is in Vic. The Vic Perinatal Data Collection Unit sen=
> ds
> the individual statistical reports to the hospitals (hospital profiles), =
> but
> doesn't give the details to other inquirers. It seems that most of the
> hospitals aren't keen to give out their information. Homebirth is
> considered a 'hospital' for the purposes of data collection, and we
> independent midwives receive a copy of the homebirth statistics. To date
> this has only covered babies born at home, not those who planned homebirt=
> h
> and transferred to hospital. However that information will be available =
> in
> the next report, as it is now being collected. what happens in other
> States? If someone from each State could respond to the list, I will
> include it in our submission for comparison. Thanks
> (j) the impact of the new Medicare rebate provided for complex births,
> including the use of the term =91qualified and unqualified neonates=92 fo=
> r
> funding purposes, and the impact that this has had on improved patient ca=
> re
> and reduction of average gap payments.
>
> Does anyone have evidence of births becoming 'complex' since this rebate
> came in? Has anyone been able to look at statistics before and after?
> Babies in some hospitals get their own UR number, for funding purposes,
> whereas others are with the mother unless they are 'qualified'. Can anyo=
> ne
> provide any evidence or information on this?
>
> I believe we have an opportunity right now to effect lasting change. Let=
> 's
> all give it our best shot. We are building on the good work of many who
> have laboured on these matters in previous years, some of whom are burnt
> out, or have been sidelined by restrictive and anti-competitive systems.
> sincerely
> Joy Johnston
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Sally Tracy
> Sent: Tuesday, 13 July 1999 19:44
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: senate inquiry
>
>
> Cathy and Nigel
> i agree it would be very good for ozmidwifery to submit a response to
> the inquiry, and I am happy to co-ordinate responses on behalf of ozmid.
> Everybody's contribution would have to reach me by the 3rd August and I
> will put them together. Doesn't matter how small the offfering is......it
> all counts...just remember to reference work submitted.
> It would also be useful for peole to offer on the line what area they
> are proposing to work on and 'advertise' for help!
> At the moment i am encourageing every mother who has the energy to
> write, addressing parts "e" and "i". Also working on a few of the others.
> There are lots of organisations presenting submissions.....and every =
> bit
> counts ...
> enclosing the terms of reference again for those who inadvertently
> deleted them!
> sally t
> Senate Community Affairs References Committee
>
> INQUIRY INTO CHILDBIRTH PROCEDURES
> The Senate has referred the following matter to the Senate
> Community Affairs References Committee for inquiry and report by 30
> December 1999.
>
> Childbirth procedures, with particular reference to:
> (a) the range and provision of antenatal care services to ascertain
> whether
> interventions can be minimised through the development of best practi=
> ce
> in antenatal screening standards;
>
> (b) the variation in childbirth practices between different hospitals
> and different states particularly with respect to the level of interventi=
> ons
> such as caesarean birth, episiotomy and epidural anaesthetics;
>
> (c) the variation in such procedures between public and
> private patients;
>
> (d) any variations in clinical outcomes associated with the
> variation in intervention
> rates, including peri-natal and maternal mortality and morbidity
> indicators;
>
> (e) the best practices for safe and effective births being
> demonstrated in particular
> locations and models of care and the desirability of more general
> application;
>
> (f) early discharge programs, to ensure their appropriatene=
> ss;
>
> (g) the adequacy of access, choice, models of care and
> clinical outcomes for rural
> and remote Australians, for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander wom=
> en
> and for women of non-English speaking backgrounds;
>
> (h) whether best practice guidelines are desirable, and, if so, how t=
> hey
> should be developed and implemented;
>
> (i) the adequacy of information provided to expectant mothers and the=
> ir
> families in relation to the choices for safe practice available to them; =
> and
>
> (j) the impact of the new Medicare rebate provided for complex births=
> ,
> including the use of the term =91qualified and unqualified neonates=92 fo=
> r
> funding purposes, and the impact that this has had on improved patient ca=
> re
> and reduction of average gap payments.
>
> Written submissions are invited and should be addressed to:
> The Secretary
> Senate Community Affairs References Committee
> Suite S1 59
> Parliament House
> Canberra ACT 2600
>
> Closing date for the receipt of submissions is 6 August 1999.
>
> For further details contact the Committee Secretary, Phone: (02)
> 6277 3515, Fax: (02) 6277 5829. E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]=
> u
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> --
> Sally Witten-Tracy
> Research Midwife
> Australian Midwifery Action Project
> Emu Bottom
> email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
> --
> 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.
