Campaigning for Childbirth Choices
Posted by realityrounds on January 4, 2010
In recent memory I can not remember any American politicians, male or female, using childbirth choices as a campaign issue. Not even in the cluster f*ck (excuse my French, er English, uhm really Irish) that is the current American health care debate/reform, we don’t hear much about the state of maternity care.
Our brethren across the pond however, have bravely taken the matter of maternity care on as a political issue. Politician David Cameron of the conservative Torie (cute) party, has promised “real choices” for English women in regards to childbirth. As reported on BBC News, Mr. Cameron had the following to say:
“childbirth was one of life’s “most daunting experiences” and that it was best to conduct this in a “non-emergency setting” where possible.”
“By putting the best local maternity provider in charge of co-ordinating local maternity care we will ensure the highest standards of safety are applied while also giving mothers access to a variety of community-led services.”
“He said many mothers with low-risk pregnancies were taking highly medicalised care in hospitals against their wishes.”
Ensuring childbirth choice by expanding services would, of course, cost some serious pounds, dollars, gold bullions, or whatever the hell the English use as currency (crowns?). The opposing Liberal Democrat party in England is sounding off on how the country will pay for expanded childbirth services in an economic downturn (seriously, is Britain upside down? Conservatives wanting to spend money? Liberals wanting to save? Whatsup ?).
Anyway, it is refreshing to see maternity care as a campaign issue. I wonder why it is not brought up much here in the colonies?
RR
Jill said
That would be pounds.
And yes Britian is upside down and backwards. Screw you, metric system and right-handed cars!
pinky said
I thought I read somewhere that Obama looked at what a huge problem it is and shelved it for now. Which is sad. Just by adding more midwifes we could reduce the cost. Adding more birth centers = reduced cost. I did a little searching on cost savings brought about by birth centers. I can pull out the study if you need it. It is on my self which is across the room. Also using Family practice nurses would save dollars too.
Yehudit said
It is a lot easier to make those campaigning commitments in opposition – when you don’t have to pay for them. On the other hand, the seismic shift in policy mindset itook place under the last conservative government (Changing Childbirth – heralded the (re)turn to community-based care in pregnancy, utilising the skills of midwives more appropriately, and massive expansion of the direct-entry midwifery programmes). The big increase in funding for the NHS has happened under labour though.
Kim Zornow said
I’m sure a lot of it has to do with our lawsuit-happy society and the expectation that EVERYONE will have a perfect pregnancy/delivery/baby/etc. While most women are perfect candidates for midwives, home or birthing center births, there will always be those who aren’t, but insist on it, and cannot understand why the outcome isn’t what they expected. Possibly, some OB’s, out of fear of lawsuits, and increasing malpractice insurance rates, downplay “alternative” birthing options. I’m willing to bet that most of our politions have no clue about this issue. I work in a level 3 NICU and care for many infants who would have been considered miscarriages, or died at birth, 20 years ago. Expectant parents need to know that complications can, and do occur, and no one is exempt from the possibility.