Comments on: Statement from Senator Rachel Siewert on the National Day of Action & the new maternity legislation http://www.mybirth.com.au/19-02-2010/statement-from-senator-rachel-siewert-on-the-national-day-of-action-the-new-maternity-legislation.html Know your rights in labour. Protect your baby and protect your body. Get informed. Wed, 09 Nov 2011 03:41:34 +1100 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Gloria Lemay http://www.mybirth.com.au/19-02-2010/statement-from-senator-rachel-siewert-on-the-national-day-of-action-the-new-maternity-legislation.html/comment-page-1#comment-287 Gloria Lemay Fri, 19 Feb 2010 06:44:45 +0000 http://www.mybirth.com.au/?p=2079#comment-287 Physician's groups like to paint a picture for the government that somehow they know what they are doing in the field of obstetrics. The statistics speak for themselves. When the cesarean rate is 30 per cent, it mean the obstetric model is broken. Every doctor in Australia should have to have the approval of a midwife before they are allowed to be involved with the birth of a baby, not the other way around. Just as a dentist can give dental care to a pregnant woman on her/his own professional merits, so can a midwife give care in her own professional capacity. If a dentist needs to involve a physician in the care of a patient, she/he can do so easily---just pick up the phone and call a cab. The government of Australia needs to allocate an amount of money per birth and give each adult pregnant women the birth coverage of her choice---including her right to birth her baby all by herself and keep the money. Ultimately, the state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation. Making complicated laws that can't be enforced has never served the public. Physician’s groups like to paint a picture for the government that somehow they know what they are doing in the field of obstetrics. The statistics speak for themselves. When the cesarean rate is 30 per cent, it mean the obstetric model is broken.

Every doctor in Australia should have to have the approval of a midwife before they are allowed to be involved with the birth of a baby, not the other way around.

Just as a dentist can give dental care to a pregnant woman on her/his own professional merits, so can a midwife give care in her own professional capacity. If a dentist needs to involve a physician in the care of a patient, she/he can do so easily—just pick up the phone and call a cab.

The government of Australia needs to allocate an amount of money per birth and give each adult pregnant women the birth coverage of her choice—including her right to birth her baby all by herself and keep the money. Ultimately, the state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation. Making complicated laws that can’t be enforced has never served the public.

]]> By: traumatisedbyhospitals http://www.mybirth.com.au/19-02-2010/statement-from-senator-rachel-siewert-on-the-national-day-of-action-the-new-maternity-legislation.html/comment-page-1#comment-285 traumatisedbyhospitals Fri, 19 Feb 2010 03:17:41 +0000 http://www.mybirth.com.au/?p=2079#comment-285 I just wanted to say Thank You Rachel for your strong unmoving position on this. At the moment we feel like you are the only person supporting us and hearing our voice in the political arena. Yes there has been some interest from other politicians etc, but no one has followed this as strong as you have and is stepping up to do everything they can to make sure women retain the right to choose over what happens with their own bodies. This is not just about the medical veto though, yes it is a huge part of it, but it is also about the safety framework being worked on right now to work out which women can birth at home with a private midwife and which women cannot. These discussions are beneficial and need to occur but they also need to result in women having the final decision on whether she births at home with her midwife or decides on hospital. The final say cannot come down to the framework like the South Aust. Policy which excludes any 'so called' risk factors eg. breech, VBAC, previous PPH of over 1 litre and the list goes on and on and on .... there needs to be informed consent and right to refusal and the ability for a midwife to choose whether her personal scope of practice will cover the women's needs. I am confident that we will be able to hold onto the rights of autonomy over our own bodies and our births and stop our private midwives for being legislated against and disciplined for being with woman. I just wanted to say Thank You Rachel for your strong unmoving position on this. At the moment we feel like you are the only person supporting us and hearing our voice in the political arena. Yes there has been some interest from other politicians etc, but no one has followed this as strong as you have and is stepping up to do everything they can to make sure women retain the right to choose over what happens with their own bodies. This is not just about the medical veto though, yes it is a huge part of it, but it is also about the safety framework being worked on right now to work out which women can birth at home with a private midwife and which women cannot. These discussions are beneficial and need to occur but they also need to result in women having the final decision on whether she births at home with her midwife or decides on hospital. The final say cannot come down to the framework like the South Aust. Policy which excludes any ’so called’ risk factors eg. breech, VBAC, previous PPH of over 1 litre and the list goes on and on and on …. there needs to be informed consent and right to refusal and the ability for a midwife to choose whether her personal scope of practice will cover the women’s needs.

I am confident that we will be able to hold onto the rights of autonomy over our own bodies and our births and stop our private midwives for being legislated against and disciplined for being with woman.

]]>