Home birth and the National Australian Maternity Services Review: too hot to handle?

Background

In February 2009 the Improving Maternity Services in Australia – The Report of the Maternity Services Review (MSR) was released, with the personal stories of women making up 407 of the more than 900 submissions received. A significant proportion (53%) of the women were said to have had personal experience with homebirth. Little information is provided on what was said about homebirth in these submissions and the decision by the MSR not to include homebirth in the funding and insurance reforms being proposed is at odds with the apparent demand for this option of care.

Method

Data for this study comprised 832 submissions to the MSR that are publicly available on the Commonwealth of Australia Department of Health and Aging website. All 832 submissions were downloaded, coded and then entered into NVivo. Content analysis was used to analyse the data that related to homebirth.

Findings

450 of the submissions were from consumers of maternity services (54%). Four hundred and seventy (60%) of the submissions mentioned homebirth. Overall there were 715 references to home birth in the submissions. The submissions mentioning homebirth most commonly discussed the ‘Benefits’ and ‘Barriers’ in accessing this option of care. Benefits to the baby, mother and family were described, along with the benefits obtained from having a midwife at the birth, receiving continuity of care and having a good birth experience. Barriers were described as not having access to a midwife, no funding, no insurance and lack of clinical privileging for midwives.

Conclusion

Many positive recommendations have come from the MSR, however the decision to exclude homebirth from these reforms is perplexing considering the large number of submissions describing the benefits of and barriers to homebirth in Australia. A concerning number of submissions discuss having had or having considered an unattended birth at home due to these barriers. Overall there is the belief that not enabling access to funded, insured homebirth in Australia is a violation of human rights. It appears that homebirth was considered by the MSR as ‘too hot to handle’ and by dismissing it as a minority issue the government sought to avoided dealing with homebirth as a ‘sensitive and controversial issue.’     

Midwifery-led care in South Australia: Looking back to move forward

BackgroundFrom the 1980s to the turn of the century, Australia saw an evolution of midwifery-led models of care, in part due to legislative reform and federal funding, but largely owing to the efforts of strong midwifery leaders and consumers who rallied for the implementation of alternative models of care. Through persistence and extensive collaboration, the first South Australian birth centres were established.AimTo better understand the evolution of midwifery-led care in South Australia and identify the drivers and impediments to inform the upscaling of midwifery models into the future.MethodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted with ten midwifery leaders and/or those instrumental in setting up birth centres and midwifery-led care in South Australia. Data was analysed using thematic analysis.FindingsThree overarching themes and several sub-themes were identified, these included: ‘Midwifery suffragettes’ which explored ‘activism’, ‘adversity’ and ‘advocacy’; ‘Building bridges’ captured the importance of ‘gathering midwives’, a ‘movement of women’ and ‘champions and influencers’; and ‘Recognising midwifery’ identified the strong ‘sense of identity’ needed to outface ‘ignorance and opposition’ and the importance of ‘role reformation’.ConclusionThese midwifery leaders provide insight into an era of change in the history of midwifery in South Australia and contribute valuable learnings. In order to move forward, midwives must continue to embrace the political nature of midwifery, enact authentic, transformational leadership and engage women across all levels of influence. It is critical that midwives pursue equity in professional recognition, work collaboratively to provide quality, woman-centred maternity care and expand midwifery continuity of care models.     

Birth centres and the national maternity services review: response to consumer demand or compromise?

Background

In February 2009 the Improving Maternity Services in Australia – The Report of the Maternity Services Review (MSR) was released and recommended improving women's access to and availability of birth centres. It was unclear if this was in response to an overwhelming request for birth centres in the submissions received by the commonwealth or a compromise for excluding homebirth from the maternity service reforms.

Aim

The aim of this paper was to examine what was said in the submissions to the MSR about birth centres.

Methods

Data for this study comprised 832 submissions to the MSR that are publicly available on the Commonwealth of Australia Department of Health and Ageing website. All 832 submissions were downloaded, and read for any mention of the words ‘birth centre’, ‘birth center’. Content analysis was used to categorise and report the data.

Results

Of the 832 submissions to the MSR 197 (24%) mentioned birth centres while 470 (60%) of the submissions mentioned homebirth. Only 31 (4%) of the submissions to the Maternity Review mentioned birth centres without mentioning home birth also. Most of the submissions emphasised that ‘everything should be on the menu’ when it came to place of birth and care provider. Reasons for choosing a birth centre were identified as: ‘the best compromise available, ‘the right and natural way’ and ‘the birth centre as safe’. Women had certain requirements of a birth centre that included: ‘continuity of carer’, ‘midwife led’, ‘a sanctum from medicalised care’, ‘resources to cope with demand’, ‘close to home’, and ‘flexible guidelines and admission criteria’. Women weighed up a series of requirements when deciding whether to give birth in a birth centre.

Discussion

The recommendation by the MSR to expand birth centres and ignore home birth is at odds with the strong view expressed that ‘everything should be on the menu’. The requirements women described of birth centre care are also at odds with current trends.

Conclusion

If there is to be an expansion of birth centres, service providers need to make sure that women's views are central to the design. Women will not cease having homebirths due to expanded birth centre options.     

The cost of vaginal birth at home,in a birth centre or in a hospital setting in New South Wales: A micro-costing study

BackgroundWomen want greater choice of place of birth in New South Wales, Australia. It is perceived to be more costly to health services for women with a healthy pregnancy to give birth at home or in a birth centre. It is not known how much it costs the health service to provide care for women planning to give birth in these settings.AimThe aim of this study was to determine the direct cost of giving birth vaginally at home, in a birth centre or in a hospital for women at low risk of complications, in New South Wales.MethodsA micro-costing design was used. Observational (time and motion) and resource use data collection was undertaken to identify the staff time and resources required to provide care in a public hospital, birth centre or at home for women with a healthy pregnancy.FindingsThe median cost of providing care for women who plan to give birth at home, in a birth centre and in a hospital were similar (AUD $2150.07, $2100.59 and $2097.30 respectively). Midwifery time was the largest contributor to the cost of birth at home, and overhead costs accounted for over half of the total cost of BC and hospital birth. The cost of consumables was low in all three settings.ConclusionIn this study, we have found there is little difference in the cost to the health service when a woman has an uncomplicated vaginal birth at home, in a birth centre or in a hospital setting.     

Where do low risk women live relative to maternity services across Victoria? Expanding access to public homebirth models across Victoria

ProblemCurrently <1% of Australian women give birth at home.BackgroundIn Australia there are very few options for women to access public funded homebirth.AimWe aimed to use geo-mapping to identify the number of women eligible for homebirth in Victoria, based on the criteria of uncomplicated pregnancies and residing within 15–25 kms of suitable maternity services, to plan future maternity care options.MethodsRetrospective study of births between 2015 and 2017 in Victoria, Australia. All women who were identified as having a low risk pregnancy at the beginning of pregnancy were included. The number of women within 15 and 25 km of a suitable Victorian public maternity hospital and catchment boundaries around each hospital were determined.FindingsBetween 2015 and 2017, 126,830 low risk women gave birth in Victoria, of whom half live within 25 km of seven Victorian hospitals. Currently, 2% of suitable women who live close to the current public homebirth models accessed them.DiscussionWe present a method to inform the expansion of maternity service options using Victoria as an example. On the basis of the maximum number of low risk women living close by, we have also identified the Victorian maternity services that would be most suitable for creation of public homebirth or low risk continuity of midwifery models.ConclusionThis approach could can be used to plan other maternity care services.     

“I knew there has to be a better way”: Women’s pathways to freebirth in Poland

BackgroundEach year a small number of women decide to birth at home without midwifery and medical assistance despite the availability of maternity services in the country. This phenomenon is called freebirth and can be used as a lens to look into shortcomings of maternity care services.AimBy exploring women’s pathways to freebirth, this article aims to examine the larger context of maternity services in Poland and identify elements of care contributing to women’s decision to birth without midwifery and medical assistance.MethodsA qualitative methodology was used employing elements of ethnographic fieldwork, including digital ethnography. Semi-structured interviews with twelve women who freebirth, analysis of online support groups, secondary sources of information and elements of participant observation were used.FindingsWomen’s decisions to freebirth were born out of their previous negative experiences with maternity care. Persistent use of medical technology and lack of respect from maternity care providers played a major role in pushing women away from available Polish maternity services. While searching for a better environment for themselves and their babies for the subsequent births, women experienced a rigidity of both mainstream and homebirth services and patchy availability of the latter that contributed to their decisions to freebirth.ConclusionsFreebirth appears to be a consequence of inadequate maternity services both mainstream and homebirth rather than a preference. Women’s freebirth experiences can be used to improve maternity care in Poland and inform similar contexts globally.     

Developing a review process for Australian midwives: a report of the midwifery practice review project process

OBJECTIVE: To develop a formal, robust and transparent process that supports and enables midwives to reflect on their own midwifery practice in relation to recognised professional standards and to identify, prioritise and act upon individual professional development and learning needs for the provision of safe, high quality care to women and their families within the full scope of midwifery practice. This process was part of a national project commissioned by the Australian College of Midwives and funded by the Australian Council for Safety and Quality in Health Care and is part of the Continuing Professional Development, MidPLUS program developed by the Australian College of Midwives. APPROACH: A multi-method, staged approach was used to develop the national Midwifery Practice Review process. Data to inform the development of the Midwifery Practice Review process was collected through a literature review, workshop consultations, written submissions and the pilot testing of a draft process. Finally, a national training workshop was undertaken to train reviewers to carry out reviews and to ensure the final process was validated and was feasible and acceptable to midwives and consumers. SETTING: Maternity care settings in each state and territory throughout Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Midwives, other health professionals and consumers of midwifery care. FINDINGS: The Midwifery Practice Review process was developed through research and national consultation prior to being validated in practice. KEY CONCLUSIONS: The Midwifery Practice Review process is currently being implemented and evaluated in Australia. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The Midwifery Practice Review Project established a national validated process for assessing the ongoing competence of midwives. The resulting program helps to reinforce responsibility and accountability in the provision of quality midwifery care through safe and effective practice.     

Looking back moving forward: The history of midwifery in Western Australia

ProblemTo date there is has been very little research into midwifery in Western Australia (WA), therefore this paper addresses a significant gap in the literature. The aim of this paper was to gain insight into the history of midwifery in WA.BackgroundSince the beginning of recorded history midwives have assisted women in childbirth. Midwifery is recognised as one of the oldest professions; midwives are mentioned in ancient Hindu texts, featured on Egyptian papyrus and in The Bible. Up until the seventeenth century childbirth was the responsibility of midwives, but the gradual emergence of barber-surgeons, then man-midwives and obstetricians heralded a shift from women-led and community-supported birth to a patriarchal and medical model. Throughout the twentieth century childbirth practices in the Western World have continued to change, leading to a move from midwifery-led care at home to doctor-led care in the hospital.DiscussionThe first non-Indigenous Australian midwives were not formally trained; they came on ships bringing convicts to Australia and are described as ‘accidental’ midwives, as assistance in childbirth came from whoever was available at the time. This period was followed by what was called the ‘Aunt Rubina’ period where older married women helped younger women in childbirth. Throughout the early 1800s untrained or ‘lay’ midwifery care continued alongside the more formally trained midwives who had arrived with the colonists.From the early 20th century, when birth moved into the hospital, midwives in WA have been incorporated into the hierarchy of the professions with obstetrics as the lead profession and midwifery considered a speciality of nursing. The role of the midwife has been subordinated, initially controlled by medicine and then incorporated into the institutions and nursing. The increase in legislative and training requirements for midwives throughout Australia and the move from home to the hospital, gradually led to the decrease in autonomous midwives working within the community, impacting women’s choice of birth attendant and place of birth.ConclusionThe historical suppression of midwifery in Australia has impacted the understanding of the role of the midwife in the contemporary setting. Understanding the development and evolution of the midwifery profession in Australia can help future directions of the profession.     

Traditional birth attendants’ roles and homebirth choices in Ethiopia: A qualitative study

BackgroundIn Ethiopia, it is encouraged that labour and delivery care are performed under the observation of skilled/trained midwifery or medical professionals. However, 70% of all births occur outside the healthcare system under the care of unskilled birth attendants, family members, or without any assistance at all.ObjectiveThis study aimed to assess the reasons for choosing homebirth and the role of traditional birth attendants in Arba Minch Health and Demographic Surveillance Site.MethodA qualitative, exploratory study was carried out between May and June 2017. Twenty-nine semi-structured interviews were conducted with various respondent groups such as traditional birth attendants, pregnant women, skilled birth attendants, and health extension workers. Data were transcribed and for analysis, structured as per the participants’ responses, sorted and categorized as per the topic guide, and presented in narrative form.FindingsThe study revealed that traditional birth attendants are actively engaged in assisting homebirths in the selected area. It was also found that many women still prefer traditional birth attendants for childbirth assistance. Reasons for choosing homebirth included lack of transport to health care facilities, distance to health care facilities, lack of respectful care at health care facilities, and the friendliness of traditional birth attendants. Lack of formal partnerships between traditional birth attendants and the health system was also observed.ConclusionsThere is a need to incorporate traditional birth attendants as a link between healthcare facilities and pregnant women; thereby, improving respectful care at the healthcare facilities.     

Multiparous women's confidence to have a publicly-funded homebirth: a qualitative study

Background

Hospital birth is commonly thought to be a safer option than homebirth, despite many studies showing similar rates of safety for low risk mothers and babies when cared for by qualified midwives with systems of back-up in place. Recently in Australia, demand has led to the introduction of a small number of publicly-funded homebirth programs. Women's confidence in having a homebirth through a publicly-funded homebirth program in Australia has not yet been explored.

Aim

The aim of the study was to explore the reasons why multiparous women feel confident to have a homebirth within a publicly-funded model of care in Australia.

Methods

Ten multiparous English-speaking women who chose to have a homebirth with the St George Hospital Homebirth Program were interviewed in the postnatal period using semi-structured, open-ended questions. Interviews were transcribed, then a thematic analysis was undertaken.

Results

Women, having already experienced a normal birth, demonstrated a strong confidence in their ability to give birth at home and described a confidence in their bodies, their midwives, and the health system. Women weighed up the risks of homebirth through information they gathered and integration with their previous experience of birth, their family support and self-confidence.

Discussion

Women choosing publicly-funded homebirth display strong confidence in both themselves to give birth at home, and their belief in the health system's ability to cope with any complications that may arise.

Implications for practice

Many women may benefit from access to publicly-funded homebirth models of care. This should be further investigated.     

The future of the Australian midwifery workforce – impacts of ageing and workforce exit on the number of registered midwives

ProblemEnsuring an adequate supply of the midwife workforce will be essential to meet the future demands for maternity care within Australia.BackgroundAim: To project the overall number of midwives registered with the Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia and the timing of their retirement to 2043 based upon the ageing of the population.Methods: Using data on the number of registered midwives released by the Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia we calculated the five-year cumulative attrition rate of each five-year age group. This attrition rate was then utilized to estimate the number of midwives registered in each five-year time period from 2018 to 2043. We then estimated the number of midwives that would be registered after also accounting for stated retirement intentions.FindingsBetween 2018 and 2023 the overall number of registered midwives will decline from 28,087 to 26,642. After this time there is expected to be growth in the total number, reaching 28,392 in 2028 and 55,747 in 2043. If midwives did relinquish their registration at a rate indicated in previous workforce satisfaction surveys, the overall number of registered midwives would decline to 19,422 in 2023, and remain below 2018 levels until 2038.DiscussionDue to the age distribution of the current registered midwifery workforce the imminent retirement of a large proportion of the workforce will see a decline in the number of registered midwives in the coming years. Additional retirement due to workforce dis-satisfaction may exacerbate this shortfall.     

Homebirth, freebirth and doulas: casualty and consequences of a broken maternity system

In Australia private homebirth remains unfunded and uninsured and publicly funded homebirth models are not widely available. Doulas are increasingly hired by women for support during childbirth and freebirth (birth intentionally unattended by a health professional) appears to be on the rise. The recently released Improving Maternity Services in Australia--The Report of the Maternity Services Review (MSR) exclude homebirth from the funding and insurance reforms proposed. Drawing on recent research we argue that homebirth has become a casualty of a broken maternity system. The recent rise in the numbers of women employing doulas and choosing to birth at home unattended by any health professional, we argue, is in part a consequence of not adequately meeting the needs of women for continuity of midwifery care and non-medicalised birthing options.     

Midwifery continuity of care and vaginal birth after caesarean section: A randomised controlled trial

Problem and backgroundCaesarean section (CS) rates in Australia and many countries worldwide are high and increasing, with elective repeat caesarean section a significant contributor.AimTo determine whether midwifery continuity of care for women with a previous CS increases the proportion of women who plan to attempt a vaginal birth in their current pregnancy.MethodsA randomised controlled design was undertaken. Women who met the inclusion criteria were randomised to one of two groups; the Community Midwifery Program (CMP) (continuity across the full spectrum — antenatal, intrapartum and postpartum) (n = 110) and the Midwifery Antenatal Care (MAC) Program (antenatal continuity of care) (n = 111) using a remote randomisation service. Analysis was undertaken on an intention to treat basis. The primary outcome measure was the rate of attempted vaginal birth after caesarean section and secondary outcomes included composite measures of maternal and neonatal wellbeing.FindingsThe model of care did not significantly impact planned vaginal birth at 36 weeks (CMP 66.7% vs MAC 57.3%) or success rate (CMP 27.8% vs MAC 32.7%). The rate of maternal and neonatal complications was similar between the groups.ConclusionModel of care did not significantly impact the proportion of women attempting VBAC in this study. The similarity in the number of midwives seen antenatally and during labour and birth suggests that these models of care had more similarities than differences and that the model of continuity could be described as informational continuity. Future research should focus on the impact of relationship based continuity of care.     

Clinical outcomes for women who had continuity of care experiences with midwifery students

BackgroundPre-registration midwifery students in Australia are required to engage in a minimum of ten continuity of care experiences (CoCE). Students recruit and gain consent of each woman to provide CoCE under direct supervision of a registered health professional, usually a midwife. Clinical outcomes for women who had CoCE with a midwifery student placed in a continuity of midwifery care (CMC) or fragmented models are rarely reported.Aims1. analyse clinical outcomes for women experiencing CMC with CoCE by students; 2. analyse clinical outcomes for women in a fragmented care model with CoCE by students; and 3. compare clinical outcomes according to women’s primary model of care.MethodsStudents undertaking a Bachelor of Midwifery program at one Australian university recorded clinical outcomes for women experiencing CoCE during pregnancy [n = 5972] and labour and birth [n = 3933] in an e-portfolio. A retrospective, cohort design compared student recorded maternal data with National Core Maternity Indicators and Queensland Perinatal Data.ResultsMidwifery students providing CoCE reported better or equal clinical outcomes for women compared to population data. Women receiving CoCE had reduced likelihood of tobacco smoking after 20 weeks of pregnancy, episiotomy, and third and fourth degree tears.ConclusionsClinical outcomes for women in fragmented models of care and receiving CoCE by undergraduate, pre-registration midwifery students are equal to or better than State data across 12 variables. CoCE should be offered to all women early in their pregnancy to ensure optimal benefits. Acknowledging midwifery students’ potential to make positive impacts on women’s clinical outcomes may prompt more health services to reconceptualise and foster CoCE.