JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for MIDWIFERY-RESEARCH Archives


MIDWIFERY-RESEARCH Archives

MIDWIFERY-RESEARCH Archives


MIDWIFERY-RESEARCH@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

MIDWIFERY-RESEARCH Home

MIDWIFERY-RESEARCH Home

MIDWIFERY-RESEARCH  2003

MIDWIFERY-RESEARCH 2003

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: Numbers game

From:

Belinda Ackerman <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

A forum for discussion on midwifery and reproductive health research." <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Fri, 27 Jun 2003 23:08:13 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (169 lines)

Dear Kate
Use the Children Act 1989. A neonate is a person in
his own right. When we count staff ratios we must
count mother and baby as 2 people. Therefore midwives
ratios on postnatal wards cannot be classified in the
same way as nurses.
In addition, use Birthrate Plus(Jean Ball and Marie
Washbrook). This is a unique workforce planning tool
that takes into account midwife 'hours' per type of
case. If you have not already participated in a pilot
for this see if you can arrange for your unit to get
involved. Invite Marie Washbrook to come and discuss
it with your HoM.
As midwives we need to get wise  and use all the
avenues to ensure we are not left continually short of
staff so that we cannot deliver quality care .
Best wihses
Belinda

 --- Kate Spenceley <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

---------------------------------

Hi Carolyn and Sue

I would also like any information about allocation of
midwives in the post-natal area. In the hospital where
I am employed, we are being questioned about our
staff/woman ratios as the babies do not feature in the
numbers. We are arguing that both the woman and the
baby should feature in the care ratios(logically!!) so
I would be very grateful for any information I can use
to support this.

IS

Kate Spenceley




>From: Sue Calvert
>Reply-To: "A forum for discussion on midwifery and
reproductive health research."
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Numbers game
>Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 12:06:23 +1200
>
>Hi Carolyn
>
>There is a UK pulbication: Towards safer childbirth
minimum standards for organisation of labour wards
which also refers to audit commission report. First
class delivery.
>There the good practice standard was 1.15 midwives to
one woman in labour.
>Also there is a Victorian (OZ) publication that sets
standards for ante and postnatal care as well as
staffing levels throughout the hosptital. It is
distributed by the union i think.
>
>Cheers
>
>Sue
>
>Susan Calvert
>Clinical Midwife Specialist
>Capital & Coast District Health Board
>Women's Health Service
>Riddiford Street (Private Bag 7902)
>Wellington South
>
>Phone: +64 4 3855999 x 6187
>Fax +64 4 3855484
>Pager 2089
>
> >>> [log in to unmask] 06/26/03
11:51AM >>>
>Hello colleagues,
>
>I am wondering if anyone knows anywhere that
allocates women and
>midwives according to benchmark (and if there is a
benchmark written
>anywhere) figures of one to one care in active labour
and four women and
>babies (that is eight people) to one midwife within
post natal ward
>care.
>
>Apart from Jean Ball's work, has anyone any articles,
research
>information etc about the appropriate/ideal
allocation within a hospital
>setting? This is separate from the midwifery model of
care and
>caseload issue.
>
>All leads, comments, articles recommended gratefully
received.
>
>warmly, Carolyn
>
>Carolyn Hastie
>Midwifery Educator
>John Hunter Hospital
>Locked Bag No 1
>Newcastle Mail Exchange 2310
>Phone 02 49214462
>Mobile 0418 428 430
>Paging ring JHH 4921 3000, page # 5528
>Email [log in to unmask]
>
>"The world is wide. I will not waste my life in
friction when it could
>be turned into momentum."
> - Frances
>Willard
>
>
>This message is intended for the addressee named
>and may contain confidential information.
>
>If you are not the intended recipient, please
>delete it and notify the sender.
>
>Views expressed in this message are those of the
>individual sender, and are not necessarily the
>views of Hunter Health.
>
>C&C DHB Secure Mail Server
>********************************************************************************
>
>[INFO] -- Virus Manager:
>No Viruses were detected in this message.
>
>********************************************************************************
>
>
>
>C&C DHB Secure Mail Server
>********************************************************************************
>This email or attachment(s) may contain confidential
or legally privileged information intended for the
sole use of the addressee(s). Any use, redistribution,
disclosure, or reproduction of this message, except as
intended, is prohibited. If you received this email in
error, please notify the sender and remove all copies
of the message, including any attachments. Any views
or opinions expressed in this email (unless otherwise
stated) may not represent those of Capital and Coast
District Health Board. (AC_S001)
>
>
>[INFO] -- Virus Manager:
>No Viruses were detected in this message.
>
>********************************************************************************



---------------------------------
Surf the net and talk on the phone with  Xtra
Jetstream!

________________________________________________________________________
Want to chat instantly with your online friends?  Get the FREE Yahoo!
Messenger http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager