I'm due on the 27th of January next year, but with all of this nonsense Krudd is inflicting, will I even GET my homebirth? Is it possible that my (medicare funded) homebirthing midwife won't be able to attend? :pray:
Printable View
I'm due on the 27th of January next year, but with all of this nonsense Krudd is inflicting, will I even GET my homebirth? Is it possible that my (medicare funded) homebirthing midwife won't be able to attend? :pray:
I think the cut off is July 2010 anyway so yes you will get it. Lets just hope and pray that they dont enforce this.
Yeah I second that!! Here was I thinking we lived in a democratic society... pffft stupid idiots!:
yes you will and i hope you do darling :)
ive looked into it and ive just lost that option and my right of choice because ruddy is an idiot.
so ridiculous
It's just so unbelievable isn't it? I'm so relieved that I'll get my homebirth this time but what about the next time? :( Does this legislation need to be passed or is this just going to happen and there's nothing anyone can do about it?
It's completely and utterly wrong!! I can't believe how backwards some things like this are going. What is wrong with these idiots? This whole subject makes me feel so angry that they are TELLING us how we can or can't have our babies!
the problem is (and im sorry for offending anyone in advance i mean no harm)
there are mostly men in parliament and they have wives who have had babies and im sure they support but they dont give birth. Their wives do.The womans body is the womans choice her birth is her right not some retired polli in parliments choice.
i hope this gets turned around its just so wrong
As I understand it, the government's promise of indemnity insurance will extend to publically funded homebirth midwives and birthing services. Independent practitioners won't be covered.
WOW Schmickers I'm totally confused then. If publically funded midwives can be insured (independent of who pays for it) then shouldn't private midwives be able to also? I thought this was a lack of insurance problem? *totally confused*
Well, yes, it is an insurance problem.
You see, in the most recent budget, the government announced several reforms in the maternity health care system, principal being that midwives would be given limited access to medicare funding, and that public health indemnity insurance would be extended to midwives working as practicioners within the public system.
They have never clarified their reasoning for this, but as I understand the system, the two go hand in hand; allowing midwives to order antenatal screening or pathology, for example, is not a traditional role for midwives and I suspect this means that those midwives who are doing so will not be covered under the government's existing indemnity insurance schemes; thus the need for this new publically-funded indemnity insurance.
Is this something of a white elephant on behalf of the government - extending indemnity insurance to the group least likely to need it, while refusing to assist those midwives who are crying out for it? Absolutely. But it is economically sound, in that what I think we will begin to see are antenatal services that are coordinated and operated by midwives, because in the current hospital maternity care system, this is really the only place where this new limited autonomy is of any use. And allowing midwives to operate autonomously and coordinate antenatal care for appropriately screened clients will be a major cost saver for the government, because routine antenatal care for low-risk clients has traditionally been overseen by medical officers, for really no reason other than without them, it has not been possible for antenatal screening to be ordered.
The optimist in me sees a future where low-risk women are able to have their antenatal care appropriately well managed by a team of midwives, and bedause of that support go on to have an empowered and supported natural birth; the cynic in me sees little more than an excuse to save money and strip doctors out of the maternity care system. Time will tell, I guess.
If this insanity continues I'm moving back to NZ for my next baby...... :(
Schmickers, wouldn't this put more pressure on pubicly funded homebirthing centres? If women who would usually use private midwives can only have a homebirth through the public system?
Well, yes, it would, except that publically funded birthing centres are already full and have waiting lists longer than nine months in many cases, which really defeats the purpose. You can put as much pressure on the system as you want, but if the resources aren't there...