Thanks Denise! What a lovely response.
Moving to Australia has re-ignited my fighting spirit regarding women's
birth rights. There is so much to fight for and so many motivated, strong
midwives and birthing women. I am looking forward to what we can all achieve
together for the future of childbirth in Australia.
By the way, is anyone going to the Wesley Hospital (Qld) on Saturday for the
'C-section: the way of the future' conference? Should be
interesting/infuriating.
Rachel
From: "Denise Hynd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Fw: 'Higher risk' in midwife deliveries
(http://theaustralian.com.au report)
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 18:18:02 +0800
Dear Rachel
I find your fedd back very perceptive
it seems that the obs are behaving
like threatened children.
And previously
Regarding the 3rd degree tear stats. I would be interested to know where
this research is from. As far a I know no-one has researched physiological
birth and it's impact on the perineum - probably because so few women
experience it.
I hope all future midwives have half the abilities you have shown on this
list in only 2 emails
You have given me great cheer for the futre of midwifery!!
Denise Hynd
"Let us support one another, not just in philosophy but in action, for the
sake of freedom for all women to choose exactly how and by whom, if by
anyone, our bodies will be handled."
- Linda Hes
----- Original Message ----- From: "wump fish" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2005 12:02 PM
Subject: RE: [ozmidwifery] Fw: 'Higher risk' in midwife deliveries
(http://theaustralian.com.au report)
As a newcomer to Australia from the UK - it seems that the obs are
behaving like threatened children.
Firstly, their stats can flawed. Other developed countries have also
looked at the evidence and concluded that midwife-led, community-based
care is effective, efficient and safe. For example, the UK is moving
towards a midwifery-led birth centre model based on research about what
women want and what is safe.
Secondly, even if midwifery-led birth is unsafe (which it is not). Surely
women's right to choose this option should be maintained. Women should be
able to access a wide range of birth options from independent mws to
elective c-section. Interesting that a woman's right to opt for an
elective c-section/induction is upheld by the obs despite the wealth of
research demonstrating it is not the safest choice for mother or baby.
However, they want to block a woman's right to choose midwifery-led care
based on safety claims. Is this about safety or power?
I am deeply disturbed by the amount of hostility directed at mws by obs.
We should be working together - mw being the experts in physiological
birth, and obs being the experts in complicated birth.
Rachel
From: "Sally-Anne Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: [ozmidwifery] Fw: 'Higher risk' in midwife deliveries
(http://theaustralian.com.au report)
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 08:23:49 +1000
----- Original Message -----
From: Sally
To: Sally-Anne Brown
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2005 8:11 AM
Subject: 'Higher risk' in midwife deliveries (http://theaustralian.com.au
report)
Sally ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) suggested you might be interested in
this http://theaustralian.com.au report.
'Higher risk' in midwife deliveries
Adam Cresswell, Health editor
30 August 2005
THE safety of midwife-led birthing units has been doubted
and the most reliable evidence suggests babies born in such centres are
85 per cent more likely to die during or shortly after birth, compared
with babies born in major hospitals.
Leading obstetrician Andrew Pesce said yesterday that a
review by the international Cochrane Collaboration - considered the best
source of evidence for medical claims - found that home-like settings for
births were associated with "modest benefits".
Dr Pesce said these benefits included higher rates of
breastfeeding, more satisfied mothers and slightly higher rates of
spontaneous vaginal childbirth (as opposed to surgical deliveries).
However, the Sydney-based Dr Pesce - who is also secretary
of the industrial lobby group the National Association of Specialist
Obstetricians and Gynaecologists - said the review, published late last
year, also found babies born in home-like settings such as midwife-run
centres ran an 85 per cent higher risk of death around the time of
childbirth. However, the overall rate is still very low - about eight
babies in 1000 live births in 2002, according to the Australian Bureau of
Statistics.
Dr Pesce also said studies that midwives sometimes used to
back up their safety claims were scientifically inferior, usually because
their subjects were not randomised - an accepted technique to remove
bias.
"Everybody says it's been shown to be safe - but it's not.
It's been shown to be reasonably safe, but without question there's a
worry about increased risk of perinatal mortality," he said.
"There's a positive effect (of birthing centres), but it's a
lot lower than you would be led to believe by people who advocate this
model."
Kathleen Fahy, professor of midwifery at the University of
Newcastle, said Dr Pesce was using the Cochrane deaths data "to imply
that something is significant when it isn't".
"What's going on here is a desire to prevent midwives from
practising their profession, and using safety to do so," she said.
Sally Tracy, associate professor of midwifery practice
development at the University of Technology Sydney, said she had recently
finalised a study using data from more than 1million Australian births,
which would be published shortly in a major medical journal.
Although prevented under medical journal requirements from
discussing the findings before publication, she said the results were
positive for midwife centres.
In an article to be published next month in NASOG's
newsletter, Dr Pesce - who also represents obstetricians and
gynaecologists on the Australian Medical Association's federal council -
said the Cochrane review looked at the results of six different trials,
together involving 8677 women.
The review found birth centre care was associated with
"modest" reductions in some medical interventions, such as episiotomies -
where a cut is made in the perineum to assist birth and prevent
uncontrolled tearing.
However, Dr Pesce wrote that the study found higher perineal
lacerations in midwife care, so the overall rate of injury in that area
was similar.
"In summary, there is now good-quality evidence of higher
risk of perinatal death in birth centres, with only modest reductions in
some medical interventions," he wrote.
Click here to sign
up for daily headlines
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.10.14/79 - Release Date:
22/08/2005
Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.10.14/79 - Release Date:
22/08/2005
_________________________________________________________________
Be the first to hear what's new at MSN - sign up to our free newsletters!
http://www.msn.co.uk/newsletters
--
This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics.
Visit <http://www.acegraphics.com.au> to subscribe or unsubscribe.
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.17/84 - Release Date: 29/08/2005
--
This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics.
Visit <http://www.acegraphics.com.au> to subscribe or unsubscribe.
_________________________________________________________________
Be the first to hear what's new at MSN - sign up to our free newsletters!
http://www.msn.co.uk/newsletters
--
This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics.
Visit <http://www.acegraphics.com.au> to subscribe or unsubscribe.
