Re: [ozmidwifery] Students, training and other things was Re: uterine rupture 1998
Hi Tania, thanks, and the idea of everyone doing 3 years is certainly woth thinking about, maybe with status for some subjects like anat phys. I know at FUSA the 1st year B Mid students were doing a lot of the first year nursing subjects (whether that was only because the course was just beginning I don't know), so I guess the first year could be cut out, and do 2 years with the same amount of births and follow-through women? I would have loved to do that. Don't know if it's possible in that amount of time though. I have to say I agree with the earlier thread of conversation that the actual catching of the baby is over-emphasized (don't babies come out by themselves?), and that spending the time with women in labour, observing quietly, assisting, learning how to be is more important, and seemimgly not counted in assessment. At least in my training it was catches that counted, though the forwarded email from Nicki Leap seems to differ, and maybe it is different for the 3 year program. Anyway, enough raving from me. Might see you at the caseload meeting in Mt. Barker. Love, Liz. - Original Message - From: Tania Smallwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2004 8:30 AM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Students, training and other things was Re: uterine rupture 1998 Well said Liz. Although I can't and wouldn't speak on behalf of other 'nurse/midwives' (which incidentally is not how I see myself, but is a common term used both here and in the US), you certainly articulated how I think many of us feel who were, in my mind, unfortunate enough not to have access to pure midwifery education. My radical idea to help midwifery stand up as a separate profession, is for ALL midwives, nurses or not, to be educated together, 3 years, same requirements. I feel that this is the only way to truly divorce ourselves from that old adage of being the Obstetrician's handmaiden. That's not a statement about the irrelevance of nursing, or that I think one is better than the other, it's what I think really needs to happen for women, and for the midwifery profession. And as a nurse in a previous life, yes, I would be willing to do that. But that's a bit off topic, what is relevant is that right now there are lots of us in this great country of ours, educated in varying ways, to be with women as midwives. We need to embrace that, not allow it to tear us apart. There is so much at stake for women and midwives at the moment in our current environment of political dictatorship and fear of litigation. Sadly, this seems to interpret into the midwifery profession falling apart at the seams, with little factions forming, all with their own idea of what midwifery truly is. I find it sad that I can truly appreciate the skill and worth of the midwife who works tirelessly in the NICU, (and I am acutely aware that I don't posess some of those necessary skills for that area), supporting families and babies through a tenuous time, but that I don't receive the same respect back, as I work using my own set of skills, supporting women to birth safely at home. We are all skilled, in many different ways. Our diversity and differing areas of skill and interest should be what unites us, not what forces us apart. And the ways in which we are educated to work in our area of calling should also be that of great interest, information sharing, and a means of learning from each other, not a wedge to drive our profession even further away from unity. Enough of my early morning ramblings... Tania x - Original Message - From: Liz Newnham [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2004 8:53 AM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Students, training and other things was Re: uterine rupture 1998 Hi Jen, I am just concerned that this becomes another 'them and us' amongst midwives. I am an RN trained midwife, though would have done three year B mid if it had been available. I am also a home birth mother and I feel there is an expectation that RN trained midwives somehow do not carry the same philosophies of normal birth. The university I trained at for my mid was passionately non-interventionist, and I have to say the theory-practice gap was huge for us too, all interventionist practice being experienced on placement. As Trish, quoting Nicky, so eloquently said, a midwife is a midwife is a midwife. All of the amazing independent midwives that I have met, worked with, workshopped with were mostly all trained in Australia in the last 30 or so years. Which means they were nurses first. The most vocal of our university lecturers who have pushed for B Mid fall into the same category. I can see what you are saying Jen, and yes, I would have preferred to have had the midwifery training that you have had, but I don't find it any more difficult, I shouldn't think, to be comfortable with non-interventionist, natural birth
Re: [ozmidwifery] Students, training and other things was Re: uterine rupture 1998
How true, enjoy it, love, Liz. - Original Message - From: Jen Semple [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2004 3:00 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Students, training and other things was Re: uterine rupture 1998 Yes, Liz, I completely agree. Thrilled to hear that you felt the passion about birth w/o intervention @ uni as well. I guess what I was trying to get to more than anything else, is just that we have the luxury of time w/ the BMid. Jen --- Liz Newnham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Jen, I am just concerned that this becomes another 'them and us' amongst midwives. I am an RN trained midwife, though would have done three year B mid if it had been available. I am also a home birth mother and I feel there is an expectation that RN trained midwives somehow do not carry the same philosophies of normal birth. The university I trained at for my mid was passionately non-interventionist, and I have to say the theory-practice gap was huge for us too, all interventionist practice being experienced on placement. As Trish, quoting Nicky, so eloquently said, a midwife is a midwife is a midwife. All of the amazing independent midwives that I have met, worked with, workshopped with were mostly all trained in Australia in the last 30 or so years. Which means they were nurses first. The most vocal of our university lecturers who have pushed for B Mid fall into the same category. I can see what you are saying Jen, and yes, I would have preferred to have had the midwifery training that you have had, but I don't find it any more difficult, I shouldn't think, to be comfortable with non-interventionist, natural birth. It is a deep part of my being, and I am just as passionate about it as those lucky enough to have done a three year B-Mid degree. I think we need to be wary about the systemic horizontal violence that occurs in midwifery, as in other oppressed groups (i.e. mid has been historically oppressed in this country both by the medical and the nursing professions), and we need to work together to change the system of maternity care in this country no matter where of how we trained, if we are passionate about this. That is precisely why the three year B mid is so vital, and political, because it forms part of an historical change for the autonomy of midwifery. Good luck with finishing your course, Liz. Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies. http://au.movies.yahoo.com -- 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.
Re: [ozmidwifery] Students, training and other things was Re: uterine rupture 1998
Hi Liz, I was responding to someone else's posts that they had spoken to mid students who felt that they were not being taught about intervention-free birth. I was saying that I have been taught do feel confident (as a beginning practitioner!) with intervention-free birth after 3 years at uni the requirement to be the primary accoucher for 40 non-instrumental births. Since grad dip midwives have 12 months @ uni are are required to primary accoucher 20 births, I wonder if it is more difficult to feel confident w/ intervention-free birth w/ this training. I'm not at all saying good or bad, them or us. Just wondering out loud. I definitely don't think that I'd feel as confident after only 12 months, but maybe if I had done general nursing first I would. Hope that makes sense. Jen 3rd year BMid, Melbourne --- Liz Newnham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Jen, I was curious to ask what you meant by I wonder if it is more difficult for them. Wonder if what is more difficult? Liz - Original Message - From: Jen Semple To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2004 11:00 AM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Students, training and other things was Re: uterine rupture 1998 As a current Bachelor of Midwifery (aka direct entry)student, I can tell you a little bit about my course. I think everybody here agrees that there is no such thing as the perfect woman, the perfect midwife, or the perfect midwifery course. That said, I can promise you all that we have learnt about working in partnersip with women, what is normal birth, and how the role of the midwife changes from autonomous practitioner to member of the team once labour is augmented. One of the things that we struggle with most is the theory-practice gap... the evidence what we are being taught at uni then the lack of opportunity to practice in that way at present (ie we get taught about hands off or hands poised most of us have yet to be supervised by a midwife with a birthing woman who doesn't firmly enourage us to keep a hand on the head /or peri). Also caseload... to meet the ACMI standard, we have all completed (or are about to complete) 30 follow throughs. For many of us, that would be our preferred model of practice next year at present, there is not one hospital in metropolitan Melbourne where we could pratice in that model. I'm not saying that all is perfect at my uni ( can't speak for all unis), but I am certain that my lecturers are knowledgable of what is normal passionate how to keep things that way. The ACMI requirement is that we are the primary accouchuer (aka catching or delivering the baby) for 40 non-instrumental births. This is a lot of births! Many are struggling to attain this figure many have done so in less than ideal circumstances. It is argued that this number should be reduced or that students should be able to count births that became instrumental, but the student remained the woman's midwife. While the midwife's role in an instrumental birth, augmented labour, etc is just as important as in a normal labour or birth, it is very different. The midwife is no longer the autunomous practitioner the student is no longer gaining experience with normalcy. Abby, I think the high standards that ACMI has set for us help ensure that we do know normal. Granted, this is still the hospital setting, but until community midwifery is more widely available to women midwives, the reality is that the majority of student midwives cannot gain experience in this setting. I cannot speak for the education of Graduate Diploma midwives (who are already nurses)... as their midwifery program is only 12 months ( their requirement is 20 births), I wonder if it is more difficult for them? Anyway, I hope my current perspective as a student is helpful. Jen 3rd year BMid, Melbourne -- Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies. Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies. http://au.movies.yahoo.com -- This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics. Visit http://www.acegraphics.com.au to subscribe or unsubscribe.
Re: [ozmidwifery] Students, training and other things was Re: uterine rupture 1998
Hi Jen, I am just concerned that this becomes another 'them and us' amongst midwives. I am an RN trained midwife, though would have done three year B mid if it had been available. I am also a home birth mother and I feel there is an expectation that RN trained midwives somehow do not carry the same philosophies of normal birth. The university I trained at for my mid was passionately non-interventionist, and I have to say the theory-practice gap was huge for us too, all interventionist practice being experienced on placement. As Trish, quoting Nicky, so eloquently said, a midwife is a midwife is a midwife. All of the amazing independent midwives that I have met, worked with, workshopped with were mostly all trained in Australia in the last 30 or so years. Which means they were nurses first. The most vocal of our university lecturers who have pushed for B Mid fall into the same category. I can see what you are saying Jen, and yes, I would have preferred to have had the midwifery training that you have had, but I don't find it any more difficult, I shouldn't think, to be comfortable with non-interventionist, natural birth. It is a deep part of my being, and I am just as passionate about it as those lucky enough to have done a three year B-Mid degree. I think we need to be wary about the systemic horizontal violence that occurs in midwifery, as in other oppressed groups (i.e. mid has been historically oppressed in this country both by the medical and the nursing professions), and we need to work together to change the system of maternity care in this country no matter where of how we trained, if we are passionate about this. That is precisely why the three year B mid is so vital, and political, because it forms part of an historical change for the autonomy of midwifery. Good luck with finishing your course, Liz. - Original Message - From: Jen Semple [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, October 09, 2004 6:31 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Students, training and other things was Re: uterine rupture 1998 Hi Liz, I was responding to someone else's posts that they had spoken to mid students who felt that they were not being taught about intervention-free birth. I was saying that I have been taught do feel confident (as a beginning practitioner!) with intervention-free birth after 3 years at uni the requirement to be the primary accoucher for 40 non-instrumental births. Since grad dip midwives have 12 months @ uni are are required to primary accoucher 20 births, I wonder if it is more difficult to feel confident w/ intervention-free birth w/ this training. I'm not at all saying good or bad, them or us. Just wondering out loud. I definitely don't think that I'd feel as confident after only 12 months, but maybe if I had done general nursing first I would. Hope that makes sense. Jen 3rd year BMid, Melbourne --- Liz Newnham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Jen, I was curious to ask what you meant by I wonder if it is more difficult for them. Wonder if what is more difficult? Liz - Original Message - From: Jen Semple To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2004 11:00 AM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Students, training and other things was Re: uterine rupture 1998 As a current Bachelor of Midwifery (aka direct entry)student, I can tell you a little bit about my course. I think everybody here agrees that there is no such thing as the perfect woman, the perfect midwife, or the perfect midwifery course. That said, I can promise you all that we have learnt about working in partnersip with women, what is normal birth, and how the role of the midwife changes from autonomous practitioner to member of the team once labour is augmented. One of the things that we struggle with most is the theory-practice gap... the evidence what we are being taught at uni then the lack of opportunity to practice in that way at present (ie we get taught about hands off or hands poised most of us have yet to be supervised by a midwife with a birthing woman who doesn't firmly enourage us to keep a hand on the head /or peri). Also caseload... to meet the ACMI standard, we have all completed (or are about to complete) 30 follow throughs. For many of us, that would be our preferred model of practice next year at present, there is not one hospital in metropolitan Melbourne where we could pratice in that model. I'm not saying that all is perfect at my uni ( can't speak for all unis), but I am certain that my lecturers are knowledgable of what is normal passionate how to keep things that way. The ACMI requirement is that we are the primary accouchuer (aka catching or delivering the baby) for 40 non-instrumental births. This is a lot of births! Many are struggling to attain this figure many have done so in less than ideal circumstances. It is argued
Re: [ozmidwifery] Students, training and other things was Re: uterine rupture 1998
Well said Liz. Although I can't and wouldn't speak on behalf of other 'nurse/midwives' (which incidentally is not how I see myself, but is a common term used both here and in the US), you certainly articulated how I think many of us feel who were, in my mind, unfortunate enough not to have access to pure midwifery education. My radical idea to help midwifery stand up as a separate profession, is for ALL midwives, nurses or not, to be educated together, 3 years, same requirements. I feel that this is the only way to truly divorce ourselves from that old adage of being the Obstetrician's handmaiden. That's not a statement about the irrelevance of nursing, or that I think one is better than the other, it's what I think really needs to happen for women, and for the midwifery profession. And as a nurse in a previous life, yes, I would be willing to do that. But that's a bit off topic, what is relevant is that right now there are lots of us in this great country of ours, educated in varying ways, to be with women as midwives. We need to embrace that, not allow it to tear us apart. There is so much at stake for women and midwives at the moment in our current environment of political dictatorship and fear of litigation. Sadly, this seems to interpret into the midwifery profession falling apart at the seams, with little factions forming, all with their own idea of what midwifery truly is. I find it sad that I can truly appreciate the skill and worth of the midwife who works tirelessly in the NICU, (and I am acutely aware that I don't posess some of those necessary skills for that area), supporting families and babies through a tenuous time, but that I don't receive the same respect back, as I work using my own set of skills, supporting women to birth safely at home. We are all skilled, in many different ways. Our diversity and differing areas of skill and interest should be what unites us, not what forces us apart. And the ways in which we are educated to work in our area of calling should also be that of great interest, information sharing, and a means of learning from each other, not a wedge to drive our profession even further away from unity. Enough of my early morning ramblings... Tania x - Original Message - From: Liz Newnham [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2004 8:53 AM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Students, training and other things was Re: uterine rupture 1998 Hi Jen, I am just concerned that this becomes another 'them and us' amongst midwives. I am an RN trained midwife, though would have done three year B mid if it had been available. I am also a home birth mother and I feel there is an expectation that RN trained midwives somehow do not carry the same philosophies of normal birth. The university I trained at for my mid was passionately non-interventionist, and I have to say the theory-practice gap was huge for us too, all interventionist practice being experienced on placement. As Trish, quoting Nicky, so eloquently said, a midwife is a midwife is a midwife. All of the amazing independent midwives that I have met, worked with, workshopped with were mostly all trained in Australia in the last 30 or so years. Which means they were nurses first. The most vocal of our university lecturers who have pushed for B Mid fall into the same category. I can see what you are saying Jen, and yes, I would have preferred to have had the midwifery training that you have had, but I don't find it any more difficult, I shouldn't think, to be comfortable with non-interventionist, natural birth. It is a deep part of my being, and I am just as passionate about it as those lucky enough to have done a three year B-Mid degree. I think we need to be wary about the systemic horizontal violence that occurs in midwifery, as in other oppressed groups (i.e. mid has been historically oppressed in this country both by the medical and the nursing professions), and we need to work together to change the system of maternity care in this country no matter where of how we trained, if we are passionate about this. That is precisely why the three year B mid is so vital, and political, because it forms part of an historical change for the autonomy of midwifery. Good luck with finishing your course, Liz. - Original Message - From: Jen Semple [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, October 09, 2004 6:31 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Students, training and other things was Re: uterine rupture 1998 Hi Liz, I was responding to someone else's posts that they had spoken to mid students who felt that they were not being taught about intervention-free birth. I was saying that I have been taught do feel confident (as a beginning practitioner!) with intervention-free birth after 3 years at uni the requirement to be the primary accoucher for 40 non-instrumental births. Since grad dip midwives have 12 months @ uni
Re: [ozmidwifery] Students, training and other things was Re: uterine rupture 1998
Hi Jen, I was curious to ask what you meant by "I wonder if it is more difficult for them". Wonder if what is more difficult? Liz - Original Message - From: Jen Semple To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2004 11:00 AM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Students, training and other things was Re: uterine rupture 1998 As a current Bachelor of Midwifery (aka direct entry)student, I can tell you a little bit about my course. I think everybody here agrees that there is no such thing as the perfect woman, the perfect midwife, or the perfect midwifery course. That said, I can promise you all that we have learnt about working in partnersip with women, what is normal birth, and how the role of the midwife changes from autonomous practitioner to "member of the team" once labour is augmented. One of the things that we struggle with most is the "theory-practice gap"... the evidence what we are being taught at uni then the lack of opportunity to practice in that way at present (ie we get taught about hands off or hands poised most of us have yet to besupervised by a midwife with a birthing woman who doesn't firmly enourage us to keep a hand on the head /or peri). Also caseload... to meet the ACMI standard, we have all completed (or are about to complete) 30 follow throughs. For many of us, that would be our preferred model of practice next year at present, there is not one hospital in metropolitan Melbourne where we could pratice in that model. I'm not saying that all is perfect at my uni ( can't speak for all unis), but I am certain that my lecturers are knowledgable of what is normal passionatehow to keepthings that way. The ACMI requirement is that we are the primary accouchuer (aka catching ordeliveringthe baby) for 40 non-instrumental births. This is a lot of births! Many are struggling to attain this figure many have done so in less than ideal circumstances.It is argued that this number should be reduced or that students should be able to "count" birthsthat became instrumental, but the student remained the woman's midwife. While the midwife'srole in an instrumental birth, augmented labour, etc is just as important as in a "normal" labour or birth, it is very different. The midwife is no longer the autunomous practitioner the student is no longer gaining experience with "normalcy". Abby, I think the high standards that ACMI has set for us help ensure that we do know normal. Granted, this is still the hospital setting, but until community midwifery is more widely available to women midwives, the reality is that the majority of student midwives cannot gain experience in this setting. I cannot speak for the education of Graduate Diploma midwives (who are already nurses)...as their midwifery program is only 12 months ( their requirement is 20 births), I wonder if it is more difficult for them? Anyway, I hope my current perspective as a student is helpful. Jen 3rd year BMid, Melbourne Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies.
Re: [ozmidwifery] Students, training and other things was Re: uterine rupture 1998
Thanks for the common sense Fiona! Well said. Cheryl From: Fiona Craig Rumble [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Students, training and other things was Re: uterine rupture 1998 Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 09:22:33 +1000 Dear Abby, I think(while not trying to speak for them) what the ladies are trying to say is, sometimes a midwife of whatever background or belief is going to have to do a VE (such as the Galea case showed - a real medical need to know if the cervix is dilated ) and even if it is only once in a lifetime, each midwife MUST KNOW HOW to do it. Hope that helps, Cheers Fiona _ Discover how everyone everything in our world's connected: http://www.onebigvillage.com.au?obv1=hotmail -- This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics. Visit http://www.acegraphics.com.au to subscribe or unsubscribe.
Re: [ozmidwifery] Students, training and other things was Re: uterine rupture 1998
You have both said it all very well i think. marilyn - Original Message - From: Jen Semple To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 04, 2004 6:33 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Students, training and other things was Re: uterine rupture 1998 Yes, Kirsten. Well said. I was wondering how longit would take a student to write! :o) JenCallum Kirsten [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dear Abby, I couldn't close my mouth anymore, sorry! You give a poor impression of midwifery training in Australia. Coming from NZ, it's true its not the absolute greatest, BUT i can say that the universities here DO NOT teach a medicalised model of care. I am quite happy with my university and so far ALL my clinical experience has been with woman having homebirths and homebirth midwives, although in saying that, there are some wonderful midwives who i admire who also work in the public system! As for the debate on VE's etc, just because we learn something does not mean we will all go out and perform them every 5 minutes! There are many skills taught to us that could be seen as unnecessary interventions, why as Andrea Robertson in the Midwife Companion ( love this book!) says, talking unnecessarily to a woman in labour and distracting her can slow things down! Personally i would rather be confident and competent in these skills so if i have to do them i am gentle and cause as less harm and discomfort as i can to the woman. I would hate to be ignoarant and say " i don't need these interventionalist skills" and then have to perform a VE and not be able to do it carefully and gently. There are still many woman out there who request them, even if you don't think so. Again, my philosophies on birth will not change just because i have certain skills in my knowledge base, they don't change who i am or what kind of (student) midwife i am, or how i see things. Many of the skills we learn don't come from the uni itself, it's when we are on clinical placements and with our follow thru woman that we learn the most. I am forever indebited to the woman who have allowed me to be with them and to the amazing midwives who offer their advice and support. It is them all who i learn the most off, not textbooks, not the uni. Cheers, Kirsten Darwin. Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies.
[ozmidwifery] Students, training and other things was Re: uterine rupture 1998
Hi Trish, Abby, could I ask where you are studying midwifery??? I'm not studying midwifery, nor did I say that I was. I do know quite a few students and midwives and have had numerous discussions with them about what they do and don't learn. I've read a fair bit about 'wise' women, don't romanticise some half-forgotten past. Don't idealise a model of training and education that isn't open to the scrutiny and evaluation of all its stakeholders. To talk about traditionally trained midwives is like talking about clouds. I think people have misunderstood what I am saying. I am not saying that traditional midwives are amazing godesses from the planet of enlightenment, I am saying that there is a difference between the way women use to learn and the way they learn now. Midwives are trained differently now, is that not correct? There is a difference in learning, there are big differences in what is taught etc etc. I do think it is very sad that student midwives no longer learn traditional methods in their training, wouldn't people agree with that? Why does "traditional" ways of learning mean that they are not open to "scrutiny and evaluation of all its stakeholders" Why not have a training program, apprenticeships etc for midwives that want to work with women at home or that was based on trusting a woman to birth and then have training for midwives that want to work in the hospital system etc? Why not have training that focuses on non intervention rather than focusing on intervention and having medical "tools" rather than natural tools? I know of midwives that couldn't give a stuff about the women they are caring for and want to work in an interventionistic way in hospitals and then I know midwives that want to work with women in their homes but don't feel like they got the training to support that. Similarly, to say most student midwives in Australia are taught obstetric nursing is an affront to those of us who struggle very hard to create curricula and learning opportunities to subvert systems that oppress women and midwives while allowing them to work safely in the system that is out there. Isn't it true though, that what is taught is more about working in the system than being with the women. From what I have heard, from conversations between student midwives and some qualified midwives is that they wished they had learnt more about being with women, natural ways of dealing with challenging, unexpected situations in labour and also to trust more in a womans ability to birth her baby. Would you have them learn for some ideal world in the future while the women of today suffer a lack of midwives who can work with them now? Why not learn for the ideal now, foster the trust of birth and then learn all the other stuff, why does it have to be the other way around. Why not teach student midwives the reverence of birth and women rather than foster the belief that birth is something that needs to be meddled with and fixed? I am not saying that this is what you in particular do, but isn't it true to say that a lot of universities do that? To be honest, I do think women already "suffer a lack of midwives who can work with them now". Have you listened to the incredible amount of stories coming from women who had their babies in a hospital setting, you know 6 months down the track when they start really thinking about what happened to them? Horrible "midwives", being treated like crap, not being acknowledged. I think that the majority of hospital "midwives" are not trained to work with women now, they are trained to work with the system, not the women. I'm with Belinda. While I believe not all midwives have the same qualities or levels of skill, it serves no purpose to create a schism, to pit us one against the other, but rather we should walk a mile in each others shoes and learn to critically evaluate why we are as we are, and determine how to make it better without blame and finger-pointing. I think that people are missing what I am saying because of already a set defensive attitude. I am not putting one AGAINST another, merely pointing out that yes, there are differences. I think it is hard to disagree with there being differences. Any blame and finger pointing I have is at the system not at any particular category of midwives. The 'lay' midwives I know, the homebirth midwives I have been priveleged to work alongside, and the 'direct entry' midwives I have met and am now helping to educate, are expected to be able to provide the spectrum of care not just for well women, but also for those who have emergencies and illness. These women need competent, fast thinking, appropriately acting midwives with a heart, and who can use EVERY tool at their disposal. I agree with the above completely, but I would ask, does the current training program for student midwives equip them with every tool? From what I have heard, no. I was at a very
Re: [ozmidwifery] Students, training and other things was Re: uterine rupture 1998
Dear Abby, I couldn't close my mouth anymore, sorry! You give a poor impression of midwifery training in Australia. Coming from NZ, it's true its not the absolute greatest, BUT i can say that the universities here DO NOT teach a medicalised model of care. I am quite happy with my university and so far ALL my clinical experience has been with woman having homebirths and homebirth midwives, although in saying that, there are some wonderful midwives who i admire who also work in the public system! As for the debate on VE's etc, just because we learn something does not mean we will all go out and perform them every 5 minutes! There are many skills taught to us that could be seen as unnecessary interventions, why as Andrea Robertson in the Midwife Companion ( love this book!) says, talking unnecessarily to a woman in labour and distracting her can slow things down! Personally i would rather be confident and competent in these skills so if i have to do them i am gentle and cause as less harm and discomfort as i can to the woman. I would hate to be ignoarant and say " i don't need these interventionalist skills" and then have to perform a VE and not be able to do it carefully and gently. There are still many woman out there who request them, even if you don't think so. Again, my philosophies on birth will not change just because i have certain skills in my knowledge base, they don't change who i am or what kind of (student) midwife i am, or how i see things. Many of the skills we learn don't come from the uni itself, it's when we are on clinical placements and with our follow thru woman that we learn the most. I am forever indebited to the woman who have allowed me to be with them and to the amazing midwives who offer their advice and support. It is them all who i learn the most off, not textbooks, not the uni. Cheers, Kirsten Darwin. ~~~start life with a midwife~~~ - Original Message - From: Abby and Toby To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2004 9:38 AM Subject: [ozmidwifery] Students, training and other things was Re: uterine rupture 1998 Hi Trish, Abby, could I ask where you are studying midwifery??? I'm not studying midwifery, nor did I say that I was. I do know quite a few students and midwives and have had numerous discussions with them about what they do and don't learn. I've read a fair bit about 'wise' women, don't romanticise some half-forgotten past. Don't idealise a model of training and education that isn't open to the scrutiny and evaluation of all its stakeholders. To talk about traditionally trained midwives is like talking about clouds. I think people have misunderstood what I am saying. I am not saying that traditional midwives are amazing godesses from the planet of enlightenment, I am saying that there is a difference between the way women use to learn and the way they learn now. Midwives are trained differently now, is that not correct? There is a difference in learning, there are big differences in what is taught etc etc. I do think it is very sad that student midwives no longer learn traditional methods in their training, wouldn't people agree with that? Why does "traditional" ways of learning mean that they are not open to "scrutiny and evaluation of all its stakeholders" Why not have a training program, apprenticeships etc for midwives that want to work with women at home or that was based on trusting a woman to birth and then have training for midwives that want to work in the hospital system etc? Why not have training that focuses on non intervention rather than focusing on intervention and having medical "tools" rather than natural tools? I know of midwives that couldn't give a stuff about the women they are caring for and want to work in an interventionistic way in hospitals and then I know midwives that want to work with women in their homes but don't feel like they got the training to support that. Similarly, to say most student midwives in Australia are taught obstetric nursing is an affront to those of us who struggle very hard to create curricula and learning opportunities to subvert systems that oppress women and midwives while allowing them to work safely in the system that is out there. Isn't it true though, that what is taught is more about working in the system than being with the women. From what I have heard, from conversations between student midwives and some qualified midwives is that they wished they had learnt more about being with women, natural ways of dealing with challenging, unexpected situations in labour and also to trust more in a womans ability to birth her baby. Would you have them learn for some ideal world in the future while the women of today suffer a lack of midwives who can wo
Re: [ozmidwifery] Students, training and other things was Re: uterine rupture 1998
As a current Bachelor of Midwifery (aka direct entry)student, I can tell you a little bit about my course. I think everybody here agrees that there is no such thing as the perfect woman, the perfect midwife, or the perfect midwifery course. That said, I can promise you all that we have learnt about working in partnersip with women, what is normal birth, and how the role of the midwife changes from autonomous practitioner to "member of the team" once labour is augmented. One of the things that we struggle with most is the "theory-practice gap"... the evidence what we are being taught at uni then the lack of opportunity to practice in that way at present (ie we get taught about hands off or hands poised most of us have yet to besupervised by a midwife with a birthing woman who doesn't firmly enourage us to keep a hand on the head /or peri). Also caseload... to meet the ACMI standard, we have all completed (or are about to complete) 30 follow throughs. For many of us, that would be our preferred model of practice next year at present, there is not one hospital in metropolitan Melbourne where we could pratice in that model. I'm not saying that all is perfect at my uni ( can't speak for all unis), but I am certain that my lecturers are knowledgable of what is normal passionatehow to keepthings that way. The ACMI requirement is that we are the primary accouchuer (aka catching ordeliveringthe baby) for 40 non-instrumental births. This is a lot of births! Many are struggling to attain this figure many have done so in less than ideal circumstances.It is argued that this number should be reduced or that students should be able to "count" birthsthat became instrumental, but the student remained the woman's midwife. While the midwife'srole in an instrumental birth, augmented labour, etc is just as important as in a "normal" labour or birth, it is very different. The midwife is no longer the autunomous practitioner the student is no longer gaining experience with "normalcy". Abby, I think the high standards that ACMI has set for us help ensure that we do know normal. Granted, this is still the hospital setting, but until community midwifery is more widely available to women midwives, the reality is that the majority of student midwives cannot gain experience in this setting. I cannot speak for the education of Graduate Diploma midwives (who are already nurses)...as their midwifery program is only 12 months ( their requirement is 20 births), I wonder if it is more difficult for them? Anyway, I hope my current perspective as a student is helpful. Jen 3rd year BMid, Melbourne Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies.
Re: [ozmidwifery] Students, training and other things was Re: uterine rupture 1998
LOL Jen, there are sometimes i just can't be quiet! ~~~start life with a midwife~~~ - Original Message - From: Jen Semple To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2004 11:03 AM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Students, training and other things was Re: uterine rupture 1998 Yes, Kirsten. Well said. I was wondering how longit would take a student to write! :o) JenCallum Kirsten [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dear Abby, I couldn't close my mouth anymore, sorry! You give a poor impression of midwifery training in Australia. Coming from NZ, it's true its not the absolute greatest, BUT i can say that the universities here DO NOT teach a medicalised model of care. I am quite happy with my university and so far ALL my clinical experience has been with woman having homebirths and homebirth midwives, although in saying that, there are some wonderful midwives who i admire who also work in the public system! As for the debate on VE's etc, just because we learn something does not mean we will all go out and perform them every 5 minutes! There are many skills taught to us that could be seen as unnecessary interventions, why as Andrea Robertson in the Midwife Companion ( love this book!) says, talking unnecessarily to a woman in labour and distracting her can slow things down! Personally i would rather be confident and competent in these skills so if i have to do them i am gentle and cause as less harm and discomfort as i can to the woman. I would hate to be ignoarant and say " i don't need these interventionalist skills" and then have to perform a VE and not be able to do it carefully and gently. There are still many woman out there who request them, even if you don't think so. Again, my philosophies on birth will not change just because i have certain skills in my knowledge base, they don't change who i am or what kind of (student) midwife i am, or how i see things. Many of the skills we learn don't come from the uni itself, it's when we are on clinical placements and with our follow thru woman that we learn the most. I am forever indebited to the woman who have allowed me to be with them and to the amazing midwives who offer their advice and support. It is them all who i learn the most off, not textbooks, not the uni. Cheers, Kirsten Darwin. Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies.
Re: [ozmidwifery] Students, training and other things was Re: uterine rupture 1998
Many of the skills we learn don't come from the uni itself, it's when we are on clinical placements and with our follow thru woman that we learn the most. I am forever indebited to the woman who have allowed me to be with them and to the amazing midwives who offer their advice and support. It is them all who i learn the most off, not textbooks, not the uni.Cheers,Kirsten Darwin. Thanks for sharing about your uni Kirsten. It is great to hear positive comments about learning. It's also really great to hear about you working with independent midwives. Is this possible all over Australia, with every uni? Thanks Love Abby
Re: [ozmidwifery] Students, training and other things was Re: uterine rupture 1998
Anyway, I hope my current perspective as a student is helpful.Jen 3rd year BMid, Melbourne Thanks Jen for sharing. It is such a shame that there is not the opportunity for practice of the theory you are learning. I was just recently talking to a friend about that. She had brought it up after watching a discussion on the BMid list. I often even wonder what is "normal" in our society, as in "Abby, I think the high standards that ACMI has set for us help ensure that we do know normal. Granted, this is still the hospital setting, but until community midwifery is more widely available to women midwives, the reality is that the majority of student midwives cannot gain experience in this setting." Is normal natural? (Just asking the question out loud) Love Abby
Re: [ozmidwifery] Students, training and other things was Re: uterine rupture 1998
Kirsten wroteAs for the debate on VE's etc, just because we learn something does not mean we will all go out and perform them every 5 minutes! There are many skills taught to us that could be seen as unnecessary interventions, why as Andrea Robertson in the Midwife Companion ( love this book!) says, talking unnecessarily to a woman in labour and distracting her can slow things down! Personally i would rather be confident and competent in these skills so if i have to do them i am gentle and cause as less harm and discomfort as i can to the woman. I would hate to be ignoarant and say " i don't need these interventionalist skills" and then have to perform a VE and not be able to do it carefully and gently.There are still many woman out there who request them, even if you don't think so. Just wanted to clarify that I was not the only one that said I wasn't really into VEs. I also wanted to clarify that I didn't say that women don't request them, in fact I am sure that many women do. As they also request c-sections, epidurals, inductions and numerous other, mostly, unnecessary interventions. Does this mean then that it is right, physically, morally, ethically etc, to perform these interventions? Or is it better to aim for full education of pregnant women and their support people ( not midwives) so that they can make a fully informed choice themselves? I did "childbirth preparation" classes at a birth centre and it was more like "hospital preparation" classes. Not that all classes are like that. I am wondering how many women REALLY know their bodies, their capabilities, the necessary interventions as opposed to the not necessary etc etc. From being with alot of women just talking in everyday life, and that is heaps and heaps from conservative christians to wild tripped out hippies and ferals, one thing I have noticed heaps is that birthing women never knew that they could say no to VEs, this is discluding women that have decided to really educate themselves, usually after a traumatic experience. Nearly every woman I know or have spoken tothat has birthed in a hospital or birth centre setting has had at least one VE without knowing what it is for. Quite a few have had numerous VEs from different midwives and lots have had differing opinions on how "progressed" they are. Also, quite a few women, that had VEs described them as painful, invasive, humiliating, abusive, weird, unnecessaryand numerous other descriptive obscenities. They also have said they were not given a choice etc. ( If any of you are wondering, I do spend alot of time with mums that have had traumatic birth experiences, some natural occurences, but the majority caused by bad care). I wanted to ask Kirsten, when you said "I would hate to be ignoarant and say " i don't need these interventionalist skills" and then have to perform a VE and not be able to do it carefully and gently.", do you think that if you were "ignorant" and chose not to learn those interventionalist skills, that then your practice would be very different? Would you see things differently in a sense of there may be a problem, challenge etc and you would use non interventionalist skills? I really am interested, because I do believe that what we learn about birth affects our attitude towards birth. I personally don't think that women who choose to not learn interventionalist skills are ignorant. Maybe they see it differently, like they think about it differently, if a real problem did occur, then they would transfer and obstetric "professionals" could deal with that problem. I think that hospitals, interventions and all that stuff are WONDERFUL for life saving, IF, not when, it comes up. I don't believe that just because a woman asks for something then it should be given, I don't believe that is empowering to women or appropriate as a caregiver. Love Abby- sharing my opinion, not fact.
Re: [ozmidwifery] Students, training and other things was Re: uterine rupture 1998
Can i just yell "OH MY GOD"! I have to go get my daughter so this will have to wait... Kirsten Darwin ~~~start life with a midwife~~~ - Original Message - From: Abby and Toby To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2004 2:18 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] Students, training and other things was Re: uterine rupture 1998 Kirsten wroteAs for the debate on VE's etc, just because we learn something does not mean we will all go out and perform them every 5 minutes! There are many skills taught to us that could be seen as unnecessary interventions, why as Andrea Robertson in the Midwife Companion ( love this book!) says, talking unnecessarily to a woman in labour and distracting her can slow things down! Personally i would rather be confident and competent in these skills so if i have to do them i am gentle and cause as less harm and discomfort as i can to the woman. I would hate to be ignoarant and say " i don't need these interventionalist skills" and then have to perform a VE and not be able to do it carefully and gently.There are still many woman out there who request them, even if you don't think so. Just wanted to clarify that I was not the only one that said I wasn't really into VEs. I also wanted to clarify that I didn't say that women don't request them, in fact I am sure that many women do. As they also request c-sections, epidurals, inductions and numerous other, mostly, unnecessary interventions. Does this mean then that it is right, physically, morally, ethically etc, to perform these interventions? Or is it better to aim for full education of pregnant women and their support people ( not midwives) so that they can make a fully informed choice themselves? I did "childbirth preparation" classes at a birth centre and it was more like "hospital preparation" classes. Not that all classes are like that. I am wondering how many women REALLY know their bodies, their capabilities, the necessary interventions as opposed to the not necessary etc etc. From being with alot of women just talking in everyday life, and that is heaps and heaps from conservative christians to wild tripped out hippies and ferals, one thing I have noticed heaps is that birthing women never knew that they could say no to VEs, this is discluding women that have decided to really educate themselves, usually after a traumatic experience. Nearly every woman I know or have spoken tothat has birthed in a hospital or birth centre setting has had at least one VE without knowing what it is for. Quite a few have had numerous VEs from different midwives and lots have had differing opinions on how "progressed" they are. Also, quite a few women, that had VEs described them as painful, invasive, humiliating, abusive, weird, unnecessaryand numerous other descriptive obscenities. They also have said they were not given a choice etc. ( If any of you are wondering, I do spend alot of time with mums that have had traumatic birth experiences, some natural occurences, but the majority caused by bad care). I wanted to ask Kirsten, when you said "I would hate to be ignoarant and say " i don't need these interventionalist skills" and then have to perform a VE and not be able to do it carefully and gently.", do you think that if you were "ignorant" and chose not to learn those interventionalist skills, that then your practice would be very different? Would you see things differently in a sense of there may be a problem, challenge etc and you would use non interventionalist skills? I really am interested, because I do believe that what we learn about birth affects our attitude towards birth. I personally don't think that women who choose to not learn interventionalist skills are ignorant. Maybe they see it differently, like they think about it differently, if a real problem did occur, then they would transfer and obstetric "professionals" could deal with that problem. I think that hospitals, interventions and all that stuff are WONDERFUL for life saving, IF, not when, it comes up. I don't believe that just because a woman asks for something then it should be given, I don't believe that is empowering to women or appropriate as a caregiver. Love Abby- sharing my opinion, not fact.__ NOD32 1.884 (20041004) Information __This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.http://www.nod32.com
