[ozmidwifery] Email addy for Optimal Fetal Pos woman

2006-01-09 Thread Gloria Lemay
I think it was Andrea Quanchi who mentioned she had an address for 
Pauline Scott.  Apparently the one in
the back of the book no longer works.  Can you send it to me offlist?  
Thanks Gloria


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


[ozmidwifery] Medicare Rebate for Antenatal Care in rural and Remote Australia

2006-01-09 Thread Justine Caines
Title: Medicare Rebate for Antenatal Care in rural and Remote Australia



Dear All

Pasted below is a media release from Minister Abbott (released today)

To my mind this is a very backward step that can enable RNs without midwifery training to provide antenatal care. It is also fundamentally flawed as it requires a Dr to oversee care.

If a GP is required to be a proceduralist Ob then there will be no new services and rural women will remain in the same dire state they are in

If the GP is not required to be a GP/Ob then this is VERY dangerous.

Also the use of RN's who do not have midwifery training is again dangerous and totally undermining of midwifery.

Using a midwife to do an antenatal check under a GP or Ob gives Drs a perfect avenue to continue to control whilst utilising midwifery in a totally inappropriate way and maximising the handmaiden role.

The Minister's office and Fed DOH have done this with no consultation with the College.

I think we need to be positive of the recognition of rural maternity services being in crisis but be very clear that the Minister's initial approach is full of holes and make it clear that rural women/midwives have provided the solution to the Minister and he has not listened.

I suggest that we all respond to our local media highlighting that this measure is unworkable.

Wheres the choice for the woman, why not the midwife throughout?

So get on to talkback radio and drum this up as an issue, because thats the only way well make change

JC
Xx

(just got the twins to sleep ahhh!!)



 

 


 


 


 

MEDIA RELEASE
 
Minister for Health and Ageing
 
Tony Abbott MHR
 

9 January 2006 

NEW MEDICARE ITEM FOR NURSES TO PROVIDE ANTENATAL CHECKS IN RURAL AREAS



The Commonwealth Government today announced that it will introduce a new Medicare item to fund antenatal checks by nurses, midwives and registered Aboriginal Health Workers in rural and remote Australia.

This will mean that qualified nurses, midwives and registered Aboriginal Health Workers will be able to deliver services rebated through Medicare when providing antenatal checks to pregnant women on behalf of a GP or specialist. 

The government is determined to make the best use of the existing medical workforce to provide people in rural areas with better health care services.

Most rural and remote health services rely on a variety of primary health care staff in the delivery of maternal health care. Establishing a new Medicare item for rural nurses, midwives and Aboriginal Health Workers is recognition of the care they provide and a further sign of the governments commitment to making the best possible use of the rural health workforce. 

Details of the new Medicare item will be developed in consultation with members of the profession and will be introduced within the next six months. It is expected that the rebate will be about $18 and that this measure will cost about to $5 million a year. 


Media contact: Kate Miranda, Office of Tony Abbott, 0417 425 227 






[ozmidwifery] Interesting article about rogue expert witnesses

2006-01-09 Thread Helen and Graham



http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,17776253%255E601,00.html

Sin bin for rogue witnessesAdam 
Cresswell, Health editorJanuary 10, 2006 

A SPORT-STYLE system of red and yellow cards is being 
considered to deal with rogue expert witnesses whose eccentric or irrational 
views are skewing medical negligence cases.Retired medical experts can earn tens of thousands of dollars 
each time they testify about whether other doctors' treatments were negligent. 
Their role has been mired in renewed controversy after an Australian study 
suggested last week that some obstetricians were being unfairly blamed for cases 
of cerebral palsy - a condition behind 60 per cent ofnegligence payouts in 
obstetric cases. 
The research found that some cases of cerebral palsy could be caused by a 
virus shortly before or after birth. Traditionally, oxygen starvation during 
birth was thought to be the main culprit. 
Alastair MacLennan, leader of the South Australian Cerebral Palsy Research 
Group, which published the findings in the British Medical Journal, blamed the 
courts' willingness to find doctors at fault for cerebral palsy partly on 
"hired-gun expert witnesses" prepared to make groundless claims that the injury 
could have been avoided. 
He has proposed the red-card scheme as a way to bring errant experts to heel. 

Under the plan, the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians 
and Gynaecologists would audit and train expert witnesses, and monitor their 
opinions for statements deemed impractical, dangerous or extreme. 
Those giving evidence without being registered, or giving opinions not backed 
by the college, would receive a warning, and a steeper penalty such as loss of 
college membership on a repeat offence. 
"Several of the American colleges have this red card, yellow card system, and 
anecdotally I am told this is reining in some of the more rogue expert 
witnesses," Professor MacLennan said. 
"In Australia at the moment, they can say what the hell they like, which is a 
real worry. It's fairly easy to fool a judge who's never judged a cerebral palsy 
case before." 
The chairman of the RANZCOG's medico-legal committee, Robert Lyneham, said 
the college was considering the plan, and was developing its own proposals to 
allow obstetricians to register as expert witnesses and receive training. 
Professor MacLennan said fewer than 1 per cent of cerebral palsy cases were 
caused during birth. 
Two international expert panels had agreed that proving the cause was a 
sudden deprivation of oxygen during labour - something that could be blamed on 
an obstetrician - would require nine specific pieces of evidence, but rogue 
experts ignored these, he said. 
"There's no policing of medico-legal opinion - people in their retirement can 
sit and give outrageous opinions without peer review, and do," he said. "They're 
often quite out of touch, and in particular in cerebral palsy they almost never 
mention the modern literature. 
"What we're looking for is nine pieces of objective evidence, not somebody 
saying, 'Oh, this baby was crook at delivery, it must be due to a bad delivery 
and in my opinion it would not have had cerebral palsy half an hour 
beforehand'." 
Another prominent obstetrician, David Molloy, said there was "a very 
difficult group of known rogue expert witnesses" who could not currently be 
dealt with any other way than to discredit their views in court. 
"There's a very substantial amount of money being made by a small group of 
doctors, when, in many cases, it's been a decade since they laid hands on a 
patient," he said. 


RE: [ozmidwifery] Interesting article about rogue expert witnesses

2006-01-09 Thread B G
Title: Message



Interesting article. Further evidence we, as a group need to talk to 
governments to have legislation changed to ensure these hire guns are harnessed. 
Letting RANZCOG tutor experts will be dangerous and will continue the 
abuse.
Hired 
guns- Medical officers that can be brought for their 'expert' opinion are so 
available. The problem is how can their views be discredited when the AMA and 
the Medical Registration Boards of all the states continue to allow them to be 
registered and 

to call themselves Dr's. Many 
of these 'experts' have removed themselves from hands on practice for many 
reasons - think about some of those as I cannot write 
it.
Their 'evidence' or statements are considered to be 
protected and cannot be referred to the Health Rights Commission as it is 
collected for forensic cases i.e.. for the 
courts.
I experienced a vicious assault and torture from a 
prisoner in an ICU resulting in chronic PTSD. I sued Work Cover, my employer's 
insurer for negligence. I settled out of court primarily because I kept on being 
sent to various hired guns for an assessment. When the insurer wasn't happy with 
what report they wrote they would then send me to another and so on. My own Dr 
would warn me prior of what this Dr would be like and he had reported their 
behaviour to his own professional college on numerous occasions prior to my 
case. Luckily I was warned about video surveillance that Work Cover also used, 
not that it mattered as my Dr said I had to stay 'with' people- safest place was 
the casino as it had security. Looked like I was having 'fun' at the clubs and 
casino yet I was so scared of been attacked 
again!
The insurer just keeps getting away with this 
abominable behaviour, the courts continue to ignore blatant manipulation of 
their system meanwhile the injured continue to be subjected to horrific 
re-traumatising that if one did not have a strong sense of justice or sense of 
well being and of self worth would be left a complete mess. NZ no fault 
insurerACC system would remove all this and it is there for the injured 
when they need it most, lawyers don't get fat, investigators wouldn't have hours 
of 'evidence' collected to discredit victims and it removes hired 
guns.
How can we address 
this?
Cheers Barb


-Original 
Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Helen and 
GrahamSent: Tuesday, 10 January 2006 7:35 AMTo: 
ozmidwiferySubject: [ozmidwifery] Interesting article about rogue 
expert witnesses

  http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,17776253%255E601,00.html
  
  Sin bin for rogue 
  witnessesAdam Cresswell, Health 
  editorJanuary 10, 2006 
  
  A SPORT-STYLE system of red and yellow cards is being 
  considered to deal with rogue expert witnesses whose eccentric or irrational 
  views are skewing medical negligence cases.Retired medical experts can earn tens of thousands of dollars 
  each time they testify about whether other doctors' treatments were negligent. 

  Their role has been mired in renewed controversy after an Australian study 
  suggested last week that some obstetricians were being unfairly blamed for 
  cases of cerebral palsy - a condition behind 60 per cent ofnegligence payouts 
  in obstetric cases. 
  The research found that some cases of cerebral palsy could be caused by a 
  virus shortly before or after birth. Traditionally, oxygen starvation during 
  birth was thought to be the main culprit. 
  Alastair MacLennan, leader of the South Australian Cerebral Palsy Research 
  Group, which published the findings in the British Medical Journal, blamed the 
  courts' willingness to find doctors at fault for cerebral palsy partly on 
  "hired-gun expert witnesses" prepared to make groundless claims that the 
  injury could have been avoided. 
  He has proposed the red-card scheme as a way to bring errant experts to 
  heel. 
  Under the plan, the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of 
  Obstetricians and Gynaecologists would audit and train expert witnesses, and 
  monitor their opinions for statements deemed impractical, dangerous or 
  extreme. 
  Those giving evidence without being registered, or giving opinions not 
  backed by the college, would receive a warning, and a steeper penalty such as 
  loss of college membership on a repeat offence. 
  "Several of the American colleges have this red card, yellow card system, 
  and anecdotally I am told this is reining in some of the more rogue expert 
  witnesses," Professor MacLennan said. 
  "In Australia at the moment, they can say what the hell they like, which is 
  a real worry. It's fairly easy to fool a judge who's never judged a cerebral 
  palsy case before." 
  The chairman of the RANZCOG's medico-legal committee, Robert Lyneham, said 
  the college was considering the plan, and was developing its own proposals to 
  allow obstetricians to register as expert witnesses and receive training. 
  Professor 

[ozmidwifery] Fw: Abbott and rural

2006-01-09 Thread Sally-Anne Brown

Dear all

And it would seem they even have this wrong - claiming proceduralist GP's 
keep rural services alive.  Most rural areas that have a health service do 
not have proceduralist GP's...


Sally-Anne



Extra funds to keep GPs in rural areas. 09/01/2006. ABC News Online
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200601/s1544349.htm
The Federal Government will spend an extra $5 million a year trying to 
keep skilled doctors in rural and remote areas It is one of two rural 
health initiatives announced on Monday Federal Health




 *** DISCLAIMER ***
This message was sent to you using the Send to a friend facility on ABC 
Online (http://www.abc.net.au). To make a comment about this email, 
contact us: http://www.abc.net.au/contact/
Be sure to also include this entire email message. The ABC is not 
responsible for the content  of this email, and anything said in this 
email does not necessarily reflect the ABC's views.





--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.16/225 - Release Date: 9/01/2006






--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.16/225 - Release Date: 9/01/2006

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


[ozmidwifery] Scheduled Caesareans...?

2006-01-09 Thread Kelly @ BellyBelly








One of the women in my forums posted this comment which I
think is very interesting, while I know there are far too many c/s as is, I
think she has a valid point. What do you think?



I was just thinking that the
name 'elective C/S' should be changed to 'scheduled C/S'. So many people don't
elect caesareans but have them as a matter of medical necessity and the term
elective implies a choice that may not exist and IMO probably contributes to
the whole 'too posh to push' perception that alot of people have of scheduled
C/S's...



I know that lots of these scheduled
caesarians are probably unnecessary, but of course some arent.

Best
Regards,

Kelly Zantey
Creator, BellyBelly.com.au 
Gentle Solutions For Conception,
Pregnancy, Birth  Parenthood
BellyBelly Birth Support










RE: [ozmidwifery] Interesting article about rogue expert witnesses

2006-01-09 Thread Dean Jo
Title: Message




Another prominent obstetrician, David Molloy, said there was "a very 
difficult group of known rogue expert witnesses" who could not currently be 
dealt with any other way than to discredit their views in court. 
"There's a very substantial amount of money being made by a small group of 
doctors, when, in many cases, it's been a decade since they laid hands on a 
patient," he said. 

Hmm... I 
would be worried about his expert opinion also considering it has probably been 
years since he last witnessed a vaginal birth! 
Sorry, 
slanderous comments should be kept to the coffee table...cuppa 
anyone?

Jo

  
  -Original Message-From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Helen and 
  GrahamSent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 8:05 AMTo: 
  ozmidwiferySubject: [ozmidwifery] Interesting article about rogue 
  expert witnesses
  http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,17776253%255E601,00.html
  
  Sin bin for rogue 
  witnessesAdam Cresswell, Health 
  editorJanuary 10, 2006 
  
  A SPORT-STYLE system of red and yellow cards is being 
  considered to deal with rogue expert witnesses whose eccentric or irrational 
  views are skewing medical negligence cases.Retired medical experts can earn tens of thousands of dollars 
  each time they testify about whether other doctors' treatments were negligent. 

  Their role has been mired in renewed controversy after an Australian study 
  suggested last week that some obstetricians were being unfairly blamed for 
  cases of cerebral palsy - a condition behind 60 per cent ofnegligence payouts 
  in obstetric cases. 
  The research found that some cases of cerebral palsy could be caused by a 
  virus shortly before or after birth. Traditionally, oxygen starvation during 
  birth was thought to be the main culprit. 
  Alastair MacLennan, leader of the South Australian Cerebral Palsy Research 
  Group, which published the findings in the British Medical Journal, blamed the 
  courts' willingness to find doctors at fault for cerebral palsy partly on 
  "hired-gun expert witnesses" prepared to make groundless claims that the 
  injury could have been avoided. 
  He has proposed the red-card scheme as a way to bring errant experts to 
  heel. 
  Under the plan, the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of 
  Obstetricians and Gynaecologists would audit and train expert witnesses, and 
  monitor their opinions for statements deemed impractical, dangerous or 
  extreme. 
  Those giving evidence without being registered, or giving opinions not 
  backed by the college, would receive a warning, and a steeper penalty such as 
  loss of college membership on a repeat offence. 
  "Several of the American colleges have this red card, yellow card system, 
  and anecdotally I am told this is reining in some of the more rogue expert 
  witnesses," Professor MacLennan said. 
  "In Australia at the moment, they can say what the hell they like, which is 
  a real worry. It's fairly easy to fool a judge who's never judged a cerebral 
  palsy case before." 
  The chairman of the RANZCOG's medico-legal committee, Robert Lyneham, said 
  the college was considering the plan, and was developing its own proposals to 
  allow obstetricians to register as expert witnesses and receive training. 
  Professor MacLennan said fewer than 1 per cent of cerebral palsy cases were 
  caused during birth. 
  Two international expert panels had agreed that proving the cause was a 
  sudden deprivation of oxygen during labour - something that could be blamed on 
  an obstetrician - would require nine specific pieces of evidence, but rogue 
  experts ignored these, he said. 
  "There's no policing of medico-legal opinion - people in their retirement 
  can sit and give outrageous opinions without peer review, and do," he said. 
  "They're often quite out of touch, and in particular in cerebral palsy they 
  almost never mention the modern literature. 
  "What we're looking for is nine pieces of objective evidence, not somebody 
  saying, 'Oh, this baby was crook at delivery, it must be due to a bad delivery 
  and in my opinion it would not have had cerebral palsy half an hour 
  beforehand'." 
  Another prominent obstetrician, David Molloy, said there was "a very 
  difficult group of known rogue expert witnesses" who could not currently be 
  dealt with any other way than to discredit their views in court. 
  "There's a very substantial amount of money being made by a small group of 
  doctors, when, in many cases, it's been a decade since they laid hands on a 
  patient," he said. 
  --No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by 
  AVG Free Edition.Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.14/222 - 
  Release Date: 1/5/2006


--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.16/225 - Release Date: 1/9/2006
 


Re: [ozmidwifery] Interesting article about rogue expert witnesses

2006-01-09 Thread Justine Caines
Title: Re: [ozmidwifery] Interesting article about rogue expert witnesses



The research found that some cases of cerebral palsy could be caused by a virus shortly before or after birth. Traditionally, oxygen starvation during birth was thought to be the main culprit. 


I have been saying this for years and didnt the Drs shout me down!!

OK so now thats the cerebral palsy stuff is biting them, its not their fault!!

Considering it is rarely caused as a direct result of birth then lets stop all the routine CTGs, cause we know the only thing they do is increase the c/s rate.

So whos game enough to start using their own words against them in the interests of women??

JC





Re: [ozmidwifery] Scheduled Caesareans...?

2006-01-09 Thread Janet Fraser



I don't think it matters what 
you call them so long as you avoid euphemisms, of which we are currently 
sprouting plenty. They're a symptom of our obstetric culture to have perfectly 
healthy women having dangerous surgery they don't need. Most research I read on 
caesareans for true medical necessity put the figure at around 5% (give or take) 
and given that most "elective" caesareans occur in this country solely as a 
result of previous surgery, they are utterly unnecessary. I feel deely disturbed 
that we have so lost touch with what caesareans are, and what they're for, that 
we no longer have the appropriate reaction that we would to any other form of 
unnecessary surgery - abhorrence. I don't believe in the "too posh to push" 
label as it obscures what's really happening. Our birthing culture, and the 
discourse around it, is now defined by surgeons and to surgeons, surgery is 
normal. There is avicious nexus of commerce and misogygny, both external 
and internal,that has led us to a point where birthing potential is 
despised and negated. It is inherently pathological to cause deliberate damage 
to a healthy body and completely contrary to the notion of doing no harm. I 
think the language involved in this harmful practice is vital and I feel that 
neither "elective" nor "scheduled" actually describes anything in a genuine 
manner. How about we call it for what it is, and maybe begin to jolt our 
scalpel-complacent society out of thinking that major surgery is just another 
way to give birth? The last obstetric document I read on the language of 
caesarean argued that in truth they should be called hysterotomies. I wonder how 
many of us would line up for something that sounds like that? It's just surgery, 
plain ole, unnecessary surgery.
J

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Kelly @ 
  BellyBelly 
  To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au 
  
  Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 11:51 
  AM
  Subject: [ozmidwifery] Scheduled 
  Caesareans...?
  
  
  One of the women in my forums 
  posted this comment which I think is very interesting, while I know there are 
  far too many c/s as is, I think she has a valid point. What do you 
  think?
  
  “I was just 
  thinking that the name 'elective C/S' should be changed to 'scheduled C/S'. So 
  many people don't elect caesareans but have them as a matter of medical 
  necessity and the term elective implies a choice that may not exist and IMO 
  probably contributes to the whole 'too posh to push' perception that alot of 
  people have of scheduled C/S's...”
  
  I know that lots of these 
  scheduled caesarians are probably unnecessary, but of course some 
  aren’t.
  Best Regards,Kelly ZanteyCreator, 
  BellyBelly.com.au 
  Gentle 
  Solutions For Conception, Pregnancy, Birth  
  ParenthoodBellyBelly Birth 
  Support