Dear Denise
The difference is we are not in a developing country - I am well aware of
the improtant roles TBAs/lay midwives etc play for the women in these
countries !!  In Australia, until the law changes, to call oneself
a "midwife" one must meet the requirements whether we agree with it or not.
Having read much about TBAs I am also well aware that they have required
education from trained professionals to improve perinatal mortality and
morbidity rates in these countries (described by Kitzinger in "The Midwife
Challenge").

I totally agree that we can all learn from each other, I feel that I didn't
quite get my thoughts across on this issue as well as I had wished. I again
agree that these amazing women should have prior experience acknowledged,
and they should be readily accepted into B Mid programmes - I was not aware
that this wasn't happening (and find it quite ludicrous that it's not to be
honest) As my argument is that as a profession, we must have standards to
protect women and their babies; then to accept traditional midwives into
these programmes, can only increase  safe choices for women.

On the subject of Ina May Gaskin - yes the ICM definition does exclude these
women - in an interview I read recently with Ina May she was quoted as
saying she believed that "certification is one important way of helping the
public to know that the certified (direct-entry) midwife has passed an
examination created by experienced, knowledge midwives and that she has
demonstrated her mastery of requisite midwifery skills.....)
www.wearsthebaby.com/articles/inamay.
 This is my argument that without any
"formal" proof of a midwives abilities then how do we be sure she is a safe
practitioner ?  Doesn't it prevent Josephine Bloggs from down the road
deciding oneday that she'll become a midwife, and with minimal experience,
start attending women in childbirth - having "done" a few births with an
experienced midwife she goes out on her own, thinking everything is great,
as most birth normally ! Then she gets the flat baby or the PPH etc - (this
is what I meant in my previous post, this was not directed at experienced
lay midwives.) This is why we have the laws we do - call it control or
whatever you like - and obviously some of these laws are not particulary
current - Qld Gov is reviewing the Nursing Act at the moment - so everyone
should pop in a submission and tell 'em what you want.
ljg



> Dear ljq and others,
> It is sad though not suprising that the ICM definition of what is a
midwife
> can be quoted to exclude midwives such as InaMay Gaskin and Sue cookson
and
> many others who give so much not only to women but to other midwives!
>
> Imagine the difficulties of so many more women in developing countries if
we
> were to out law Traditional Birth Attendants?
> I know from my time in PNG that failing to learn from them, infact they
were
> never mentioned 20 years ago and imposing western birthing practices
> "midwifery" (now I know to be obstetric nursing) but then and now as
> approved by ICM, for I see current midwives telling and doing the same to
> women in hospitals here and elsewhere.
>  Anyway this registered midwife learnt the hard way to stop doing most of
> those things I was taught in the UK to do, to explore what is possible and
> the results have been the most wonderous births and babies! for me
> inspiration has come from midwives who have not stayed or either not began
> within the formal and limiting organisational structures.
>
> Also the history of midwifery makes me think Sue, and other lay midwives,
> has not only a lot to offer and positive reasons why we should embrace and
> seek to share the knowledge and experience of these strong, individual
women
> who are motivated to take a singular unsupported to be with women.
> The regulation of our forebears was an introduction to not only control by
> the medical and nursing fraternities but also resulted in the lose of most
> midwifery knowledge.
> Knowledge which we are still struggling to rediscover thanks again to
> independent and divergent midwives and women who have struggled to reject
> the medical limitations and interventions of birth which were taught to
many
> of us as normal and safe birthing practices!!
>
> It is also incongruent and sad in this age of Recognition of prior
learning
> in most colleges and universities that the program that our profession has
> been so strong in intiating does not apply this principle particularly in
> light of the new costiutional changes, NZ's example of partnership and
what
> it can produce as well as the new learning that is coming from the
practice
> of MIPPs and homebirth.
>
> It is not the act of a nurturing profession to be exclusive rather to
> inclusive and seek common ground and partnerships toward mutual goals then
> we will be advancing the goal of
> "Peace at birth
> Peace on Earth"
>
> Denise
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "ljg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 6:41 AM
> Subject: Re: Fwd: Support homebirth on Thursday
>
>
> > I must agree wholeheartedly with Trish - lets all remember the
> International
> > Confederation of Midwives definition of a Midwife
> >
> >     "having been regularly admitted to a midwifery educational program,
> duly
> > recognised in the country in which it is located,         has
successfully
> > completed the prescribed course of studies in midwifery and has acquired
> the
> > requisite qualifications to be     registered and/or legally licensed to
> > practise midwifery".
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > While Claire Brassard may be a very competent birth attendant (I have
no
> > way of
> > > knowing either way), and there may be other 'traditional' birth
> attendants
> > out
> > > there, I cannot support such a protest until such time as we have
> > recognition of
> > > their knowledge and skills against the same criteria that formally
> > prepared
> > > midwives do.
> > >
> > > In all States and Territories and in most countries around the world
the
> > word
> > > 'midwife' is a protected title. This means that only those people who
> meet
> > their
> > > country's criteria to be recognised as a midwife can be called a
midwife
> > and can
> > > practise under law as a midwife. The QNC has no option but to take
this
> > action
> > > because neither it nor any other regulatory authority in Australia has
> the
> > power
> > > to 'recognise' these women as midwives.
> > >
> > > I reiterate, this is irregardless of their level of knowledge, skill
and
> > > experience, and many of you would argue that some of these women would
> run
> > rings
> > > around us formally educated midwives. That is as may be. But how does
> > anyone
> > > know for sure? With no standard against which they can be measured for
> > minimum
> > > requirements to competence?
> > >
> > > I therefore suggest that it is self-defeating to ask for an individual
> to
> > claim
> > > the title 'midwife' and the right to practise as such when there is no
> > statute,
> > > and no caveat that will allow it. Rather it would be more to the point
> to
> > try to
> > > create the process that would recognise 'other' ways of entering the
> > profession
> > > besides formal studies. USA managed this process. It will be costly
and
> > > time-consuming and might fail. But it is imperative to protect the
right
> > of
> > > women to have a standard of midwife, because if the standard can vary
> > greatly
> > > across formal programs when there are all sorts of processes in place
to
> > enforce
> > > them, then the standard for those without formal training and
education
> > can vary
> > > even more greatly..... But we will never know because they are never
> > measured.
> > > And anyone could lay claim to the title 'midwife'. And that is not a
> > situation I
> > > would like to see happen.
> > >
> > > Women might want choices, but they want and deserve some assurance
that
> > the
> > > choices they make are from safe alternatives. They must trust the
> > profession to
> > > regulate itself in their interests because not every woman has the
> > resources to
> > > investigate each birth attendant herself. This is actually working
quite
> > well,
> > > and the processes put in place to begin national standardisation in
the
> > last
> > > couple of years will assure that it works even better in the future.
It
> is
> > hoped
> > > women will have a greater say in how these processes work and what
> > standards
> > > will be met from now on. And that might include recognition of 'lay'
or
> > > 'traditional' birth attendants as midwives.
> > >
> > > Just my thoughts, and with greatest respect to individuals referred
to,
> > who may
> > > indeed be the safest attendant possible. Trish David.
> > >
> > > Toni Cannard wrote:
> > >
> > > > Dear Ozmidwifery People,
> > > >
> > > > Claire Brassard, a traditional midwife, (read not a registered nurse
> or
> > > > midwife) is being banned from giving care to pregnant women by the
> > > > Queensland Nursing Council (QNC).
> > > >
> > > > The e-mail that follows tells you how you can participate in a
> Brisbane
> > > > Protest tomorrow to give the press, media and pollies the following
> > message:
> > > >
> > > > "Women want choices.  Women who choose homebirth want the option of
> > choosing
> > > > a traditional midwife."
> > > >
> > > > Time to stand up and be counted - do we support women having free
> choice
> > or
> > > > do we only support women choosing from the the options we would like
> > them to
> > > > have?
> > > >
> > > > Working for true choice,
> > > >
> > > > Toni Cannard
> > > > Vice President
> > > > AIMS Australia Inc (Association for Improvements in the Maternity
> > Services -
> > > > A consumer action group)
> > > >
> > > > >From: "Bruce Teakle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > >>Subject: Support homebirth on Thursday
> > > > >Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 15:21:50 +1000
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >Bruce Teakle
> > > > >Lindsay Rd
> > > > >Mt Glorious 4520
> > > > >Ph 07 3289 0231
> > > > >
> > > > >Dear supporters of homebirth,
> > > > >
> > > > >You should know by now that Claire is going to court on thursday,13
> th
> > of
> > > > >december for the Supreme court to force her to cease caring for
> > pregnant
> > > > >women.
> > > > >
> > > > >There is a telephone process underway to get as many supporters to
> the
> > > > >Brisbane Court by 9.15 am on thursday morning as possible. Please
> think
> > > > >about who you know who might come to support our right to a "SAFE,
> > > > >RESPONSIBLE, CARING" choice in birthing, and put out the word. It's
> > just
> > > > >fine if people hear more than once.
> > > > >
> > > > >The Theme
> > > > >
> > > > >There are several purposes to our gathering.
> > > > >>1. To farewell Claire from our service, and grieve for the loss of
> her
> > > > >>care.
> > > > >>2. To celebrate the spirit of midwifery and its long tradition.
> > > > >>3. To bear witness to the action of the state in denying us
Claire's
> > care.
> > > > >>4. To express our dissatisfaction with the poor service of our
> > political
> > > > >>servants in regard to respecting women's right of choice in
> birthing.
> > > > >Hopefully this will include some coverage by the media, and we are
> > working
> > > > >at getting that to happen.
> > > > >
> > > > >The Image
> > > > >
> > > > >We will look (and be) powerful, in a way which is most likely to
make
> > our
> > > > > >political servants take notice.
> > > > >
> > > > >I propose that we behave somewhat like we are seeing off the queen
> > (Claire
> > > > >is not the queen, actually sometimes she's just very naughty.
> > > > >However.....).  For some of us Claire is the person who has given
us
> > the
> > > > >sort of loving care we are seeking in birth. For others, she may
> > symbolise
> > > > >the care we have had from another midwife or even what we think
women
> > > > >deserve. What we express in love and respect for Claire is symbolic
> of
> > our
> > > > >feelings about the >model of care we seek.
> > > > >
> > > > >So let us dress and perform as if we are farewelling the queen.
> > Flowers,
> > > > > >children, kisses, tears, families, our best clothes.
> > > > >
> > > > >Don't get me wrong, this isn't wet and weak, this is a
demonstration
> of
> > the
> > > > >state interfering in the lives of ordinary loving families, for no
> > reason,
> > > > >and that does not look good.
> > > > >
> > > > >The Routine
> > > > >
> > > > >We turn up at 9.15. We can't afford to be late. Don't forget this
is
> > the
> > > > >city at peak hour, and driving in, and finding parking is a slow,
> > terrible
> > > > >and expensive business. Consider taking the train from somewhere
> > > > >convenient.  The court is equal distances from Central and Roma
> street
> > > > >stations, both are very close.
> > > > >
> > > > >We arrive, assemble outside the court building, and prepare for
> > Claire's
> > > > >arrival soon after 9.30. When Claire arrives she walks the aisle we
> > prepare
> > > > >for her, kissing and farewelling. This is when our photo
> opportunities
> > are,
> > > > >when we all need to be there and prepared.
> > > > >
> > > > >She goes into court with her barrister and those of us who can go
in
> > > > >(without children) to witness the proceeding. The court proceedings
> > > > >(everyone already inside and assembled) should start at 10.00 and
> take
> > 10
> > > > >minutes.
> > > > >
> > > > >Claire will then have finished her 22 years of renegade traditional
> > > > >midwifery.
> > > > >
> > > > >What next? I don't know. I'll let my beard grow back, and we can
get
> > back
> > > > >to normal (whatever that was) for a few weeks.
> > > > >
> > > > >We certainly have a big job to do in january, with the competition
> > policy
> > > > > >stuff and so on, and preparing to get back onto our
> representative's
> > > > >agenda's after their holidays. This is a big task we have embarked
> on,
> > and
> > > > >we won't be letting go.
> > > > >
> > > > >See  you there on thursday.
> > > > >
> > > > >Best wishes from Bruce.
> > > >
> > > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
> > http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > 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.
>









--
This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics.
Visit <http://www.acegraphics.com.au> to subscribe or unsubscribe.

Reply via email to