The role,practice and training of unregulated birth workers in Australia: A mixed methods study

Background

In Australia, the provision of homebirth services by unregulated birthworkers (doulas, ex-registered midwives, traditional midwives and lay workers) has increased. Accessing a homebirth with a registered midwife via mainstream services is limited. Concern is growing that new legislation aimed at prohibiting unregulated birthworkers practice may result in homebirth going underground.

“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.     

Not addressing the root cause: An analysis of submissions made to the South Australian Government on a Proposal to Protect Midwifery Practice

BackgroundReports of unregulated birth workers attending birth at home, with no registered midwife in attendance (freebirth), have become more frequent in Australia in recent years. A Coronial Inquiry (2012) into the deaths of three babies born at home in South Australia resulted in a call for legislation to restrict the practice of midwifery to registered midwives. A Proposal to Protect Midwifery Practice in South Australia was issued as a consultation paper in January 2013.AimTo report the views of those making a submission to the Proposal to Protect Midwifery Practice in South Australia.MethodsThirty submissions to the South Australian Government were downloaded, read and thematically analysed.FindingsTwenty-five (81%) submissions supported the legislation, 5 (16%) opposed it and 2 (6%) were neither for nor against. Support for the proposed legislation was strong, however the underlying root causes that have led to the rise of UBWs attending homebirth in Australia were not addressed. Recommendations called for all stakeholders to work with women to develop a better framework of care that respected and met their needs and choices whilst safeguarding maternal and neonatal health.ConclusionsThe Proposal to Protect Midwifery Practice may promote greater protection of midwifery practice however, Private Indemnity Insurance (PII), collaborative agreements and power struggles associated with the medical domination of childbirth continue to marginalise homebirth and prevent women from accessing the care they want and need. These unresolved issues represent the root causes for UBWs attending homebirth; hence the proposal is only a partial solution.     

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.     

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.     

Who decides the position for birth? A follow-up study of a randomised controlled trial

BackgroundPhysical benefits are suggested for women and their babies when women adopt an upright position of their choice at birth. Available care options during labour influence women's impressions of what intrapartum care is. This indicates that choice of birth positions may be determined more by midwives than by women's preferences.QuestionThe aims of this study were to investigate factors associated with adherence to allocated birth position and also to investigate factors associated with decision-making for birth position.MethodAn invitation to answer an on-line questionnaire was mailed.FindingsDespite being randomised, women who gave birth on the seat were statistically significantly more likely to report that they participated in decision-making and that they took the opportunity to choose their preferred birth position. They also reported statistically significantly more often than non-adherers that they felt powerful, protected and self-confident.ConclusionsMidwives should be conscious of the potential impact that birth positions have on women's birth experiences and on maternal outcomes. Midwives should encourage women's autonomy by giving unbiased information about the birth seat. An upright birth position may lead to greater childbirth satisfaction. Women's experience of and preferences for birth positions are consistent with current evidence for best practice.     

Remote access and care: A comparison of Queensland women's maternity care experience according to area of residence

BackgroundThis study fills a gap in the literature with a quantitative comparison of the maternity care experiences of women in different geographic locations in Queensland, Australia.MethodData from a large-scale survey were used to compare women's care experiences according to Australian Standard Geographical Classification (major city, inner regional, outer regional, remote and very remote).ResultsCompared to the other groups, women from remote or very remote areas were more likely to be younger, live in an area with poorer economic resources, identify as Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander and give birth in a public facility. They were more likely to travel to another city, town or community for birth. In adjusted analyses women from remote areas were less likely to have interventions such as electronic fetal monitoring, but were more likely to give birth in an upright position and be able to move around during labour. Women from remote areas did not differ significantly from women from major cities in their satisfaction with interpersonal care. Antenatal and postpartum care was lacking for rural women. In adjusted analyses they were much less likely to have booked for maternity care by 18 weeks gestation, to be telephoned or visited by a care provider in the first 10 days after birth. Despite these differences, women from remote areas were more likely to be breastfeeding at 13 weeks and confident in caring for their baby at home.ConclusionsFindings support qualitative assertions that remote and rural women are disadvantaged in their access to antenatal and postnatal care by the need to travel for birth, however, other factors such as age were more likely to be significant barriers to high quality interpersonal care. Improvements to maternity services are needed in order to address inequalities in maternity care particularly in the postnatal period.     

Regulation of unregistered birth workers in Australia: Homebirth and public safety

Background

Australian midwives are regulated under the National Registration and Accreditation Scheme. Unregistered birth workers may provide midwifery services at homebirths without any regulatory oversight. To address this issue, several states have passed legislation enabling prohibition orders to be made (negative licensing) against unregistered health practitioners who fail to comply with a statutory code of conduct developed for those not covered by the National Scheme.

Women's perspective of maternity care in Cambodia

BackgroundConsideration of the needs of pregnant women and their ability and willingness to attend maternal services and pay for them is central to the provision of accessible and acceptable maternal care. Women's satisfaction with maternal services is poorly understood in many developing countries, including Cambodia in South East Asia. The objective of this study was to investigate women's perceptions and experiences of private and public skilled birth attendants, including midwives, during childbirth in Cambodia.MethodsA qualitative design using a naturalistic inquiry approach was undertaken to seek sensitive personal issue. Thirty individual in-depth interviews were conducted with women who had recently given birth at private and public health facilities in one province in Cambodia. Data were analysed using a thematic approach.FindingsWomen's choice of health facility was influenced by their perceptions of safety and staff attitudes. Reported barriers to the effective utilisation of public maternity services were costs associated with the birth, staff attitudes and a lack of supportive care during labour and in the postpartum period. Although private health care is more expensive than public health care, some women reported a preference for private birth attendants as they perceived them to provide safer and more supportive care in labour.ConclusionWomen expect, but do not always receive humane, professional, supportive and respectful treatment from public skilled birth attendants. While the removal of unexpected costs and geographical barriers are important to increasing public maternity care and service utilisation, improvements in maternity services should focus on addressing provider attitudes and enhancing communication skills during labour, birth and the immediate postpartum period.     

The need for improved emotional support: A pilot online survey of Australian women’s access to healthcare services and support at the time of miscarriage

ProblemWomen need improved emotional support from healthcare professionals following miscarriage.BackgroundSignificant psychological morbidity can result following miscarriage and may be exacerbated by poor support experiences. Women frequently report high levels of dissatisfaction with healthcare support at this time.AimThis study was developed to pilot a survey aimed at exploring women’s access to healthcare services and support at the time of miscarriage.MethodsWomen over 18 years, residing in Australia, who had experienced a miscarriage in the past two years completed a 29-item online survey.FindingsA total of 399 women completed the survey. Two key findings arose: 1) More than half of women (59%) were not offered any information about miscarriage or pregnancy loss support organisations or referral/access to counselling services at the time of miscarriage, despite almost all reporting they would have liked various forms of support from items listed 2) More than half (57%) did not receive follow up care, or emotional support at this time, beyond being asked how they were coping emotionally. Other findings showed 3) Women accessed various healthcare services at the time of miscarriage and 4) Women often saw a general practitioner at the time of miscarriage despite having a private obstetrician.ConclusionThere is clear mismatch between the support women want at the time of miscarriage and the care they receive from healthcare professionals. Despite considerable structural barriers, it seems likely there is scope within healthcare professionals’ usual practice for improved support care through simple measures such as increased acknowledgement, information provision and referral to existing support services.     

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.’     

Women’s experiences of intrapartum care and recovery in relation to planned caesarean sections: An interview study

Problem and backgroundApproximately one third of women in high-income countries give birth by caesarean section (CS). Better understanding of women’s CS experiences is vital in identifying opportunities to improve women’s experience of care.AimTo identify opportunities for service improvement by investigating Australian women’s experiences of care and recovery when undergoing a planned CS.MethodsQualitative telephone interview study with 33 women who had a planned CS at one of eight Australian hospitals. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to elicit women’s perspectives, experiences and beliefs surrounding their planned CS. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed inductively using NVivo-12.ResultsWomen’s experiences of CS care were mixed. Regarding intrapartum care, many women stated their planned CS was a positive experience compared to a previous emergency CS, but was scarier and more medicalised compared to vaginal birth. CS recovery was viewed more negatively, with women feeling unprepared. They reported disliking how CS recovery restricted their role as a mother, wanting more time in hospital, and greater support and continuity of care.DiscussionWomen reported largely positive intrapartum experiences of planned CS but relatively negative experiences of CS recovery. They wished for time in hospital and support from staff during recovery, and continuity of care.ConclusionBy incorporating shared decision-making antenatally, clinicians can discuss women’s birth expectations with them and better prepare them for their planned CS and recovery.