Hi all,
I wrote a letter to Peter Dutton on the topic of homebirth. He's taken a while to reply, so I'm wondering if he has written back to anyone else or whether he is ignoring the correspondence.
If he has replied, what did he say to you?
Cheers,
Fiona
Ok, I wrote to my local MP and he's a Lib (no, I didn't vote for him :p ):
His response::
Dear Mr Wood,
I am writing to express my absolute dismay at the turn of events this week and how it will impact negatively on birthing in Australia.
Satisfaction of the birthing process has a direct relationship with the success rates of breastfeeding retention, and for many Australian women this occurs because of their ability to hire a qualified and registered private midwife.
Thus far, those who choose homebirth have not been the litigious types and no midwife has been made bankrupt from being sued without possessing indemnity insurance. This is the nature of the homebirthing community. We just want to homebirth with continuity of care from a care provider who actually cares.
As it stands, with this legislation, we live in a country where abortion is legal and it is legal to freebirth. Both of these I support. Yet to choose the option of having an experienced midwife in attendance will no longer be possible after next year. This seems insane to me.
To tie registration in with insurance as a legal requirement is going to make homebirthing unsafe because midwives will miss out on the truly professionally (and personally) enriching experience of attending homebirth, meaning a great pool of knowledge will just dry up. Just like the older obstetricians who have dared make specialties out of delivering breach babies who cannot pass on their expertise due to hospital policies that act out of fear of litigation, rather than the best interests of their patients.
It has been frustrating to see RANZCOG equate homebirth with freebirthing in their media forays, and now it will be a self-fulfilling tale - homebirthing will ONLY be freebirthing. The medicos will be proven 'right', and normal pregnancies and births will become medicalised to suit the politically powerful. This does not serve women, it does not serve newborns, it does not serve the wellbeing of mother-infant dyads and it only serves hospital administrations and obstetric specialists. Keeping in mind that obstetrics is supposed to be for complications, or it creates complications - it has no place in normal pregnancy, which 90% of women would otherwise experience, and would culminate in a normal birth without medicalisation and the 'cascade of interventions'.
Empirical data from countries where homebirth is funded and supported by health administrations suggests great success for all parties. However, due to the nature of this new legislation and its effective consequences, I must doubt my premise that the legislation is based on balanced information provided to or sought by the Minister for Health. It makes no sense. Either she has sighted world's best practice, in which case she would not have enacted the legislation, or she has not. The former would confound and the latter would reek of RANZCOG and AMA power and influence.
I will be one of the many faces in the crowd on September 7 at Parliament House, with my 8 month pregnant belly. I am planning an October homebirth, and will have to freebirth my third child if nothing changes in the interim, or if I travel to NZ to obtain midwifery care.
Homebirthing is currently not a genuine 'choice' available to fertile women (mine will cost all of the baby bonus, with none left over for after the birth - and will STILL cost less than a state-funded hospital birth), and after July 1 next year will be taken off the list of 'choices'.
Sincerely,
[name]
Mother, CFA Volunteer, Psychology Student and Anthropology Hons
So, let's hope there's a bunch of other chicks in my electorate who have bombarded him with emails and letters! That way, my information will be collaborated and he and his advisors will know what information to look for.:
Thank you for your recent email regarding indemnity insurance for midwives. I can certainly appreciate why you are upset.
As you may be aware there was some provision for Commonwealth subsidised indemnity insurance announced in this year’s Budget. The announced measures by the Rudd Labor Government for indemnity insurance, PBS and MBS access are for midwives working in collaborative settings and do not provide for birthing services outside of a clinical setting.
The Rudd Labor Government has recently introduced legislation into the Parliament to enact these measures and a number of questions and concerns have been raised with respect to these Bills.
The Coalition supports the referral of the Bills to a Senate Committee Inquiry and we look forward to considering the evidence and findings that result.
Thank you again for bringing your concerns to my attention. As the Coalition continues consultation with relevant stakeholders on this issue, your views on this are very important.
Kind regards
Jason Wood