Re: [ozmidwifery] Midwife petition

[Callum & Kirsten Wooster]

I too had the same response from others and concerns myself.   A midwife is a midwife is a midwife full stop!   Kirsten ----- Original Message ----- From: Dean & Jo To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 7:15 PM Subject: [ozmidwifery] Midwife petition I have had an interesting experience regarding the midwife insurance petition today that I was hoping can be passed on to those who are conducting it.   There was a great opportunity for me to get quite a number of signatures today but the thing that was focused on was the wording of the document, in particular the reference to midwife ‘Practioner.’  There is strong opposition to the term as it fragments the role/scope of practice of midwives.  Midwives have a scope of practice which does not require the segmentation of the type of midwife.  A fully trained midwife does not need to do further study or qualifications to them be a Midwife Practioner.  It implies that one midwife is more qualified than another like the nurse and the nurse Practioner.  The ACMI are working hard to get recognition for the role of a midwife and the scope of practice…all midwives are/should be able to do ante-natal, intrapartum and post natal including pathology and testing (despite the fact that the current system does not formally allow them to do so due to the issues with Medicare provider numbers)   It was unfortunate that the wording was on the petition as no one would sign it on that ground.  I know it sounds pedantic but it is a very serious issue for many midwives.  Can this be passed on to those conducting the petition so they are aware of it?  They can contact me if they wish to discuss it. Cheers   Jo -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.15 - Release Date: 4/16/2005