Dear ljg
I think we are talking at cross purposes here I am saying there is a place
for all paths to learning about being with women and if we  reject or say
one is the way and the other the infedel/lost (to follow another exclusivist
> example) - at our own and the lose of women.
> Denise
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "ljg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 6:43 AM
> Subject: TBAs etc
>
>
> > 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.
>

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

Reply via email to