|
As regards the FH monitoring giudelines when you
look at the NICE site their recommendations flow from the Royal College of Obs
&Gobs
so I wondered what the kiwi and Dutch midwves
do??
When I started to search
I found the debate is happening in NZ as to
But
Whose Art Frames the Questions?
Midwives need to be vigilant to ensure the
defining of appropriate midwifery practice is not colonized by obstetric
thought. Any guiding must reflect the essential Midwifery Model of Care in the
evidence amassed and the way in which it is applied ... Guildelines quickly
become claimed as 'standard practice' - which is then passed on to students as
midwifery knowledge ... A great deal of power is given to Guidelines ... this
impacts on how far a midwife can 'stray' from the dominant medicalised culture
of birth ... (Go to full
http://www.birthspirit.co.nz/
Cas wrote:"it is normal practice to have bub
in recovery so long as both mother and baby are well."
Unfortunately this is not so here in
Perth. We have had major battles over many years to have well babies
stay with their mothers in recovery at KEMH but this has been denied
for many reasons, mostly because" the C/S women share the recovery room with
other women who had gynae surgery" etc. it is also surprising that so
many baies who are "rescued" from foetal distess have apgars over 7 and need
no further treatment. Is this a misreading of the FH monitor? a
panic reaction to a EFM trace?
Denise, the trials that showed "intermittant
monitoring " equal to/better than continuous was using the intensive
monitoring regime that Lesley spoke about. Not the more relaxed
one. Cheers, MM
|
