Hi Claire
Thank you for doing this. I'm very tempted to ask if my name can be added, like Margaret's, as a consumer. I guess we'd want this to be relatively formal, so 'Dr Jo Dagustun (consumer)' might be appropriate. But then there is a ref in the text doesn't extend to service users, I think, so I thought I'd ask the question. The stuff on including service-users in next steps is strong though, so maybe a few of us signing in that role would be sensible?
You've done a great job pulling this together into a well-structured letter (and deciding on a narrow focus - as long as this is done in a way that underlines the choice of focus for this letter and doesn't imply that everything else about the SBLCv2 is well-accepted as perfect!) Just one point I noticed was missing: I wonder whether you might want to include the suggestion about services possibly getting a buddy HCP to listen in to the FHR over the phone: that struck me as a really important example of how this policy might be implemented in a way not foreseen by the policy makers, in a way that needs some consideration. (Unintended consequences and all that.) But then it gets very complicated to figure out what would happen in such areas if there was no listening over the phone ...
I was also wondering about the addressee. I can see why midwives would want to air these concerns with KG, but is there a wider copy list this letter should go to at the same time? Or is this a step by step approach, maybe?
There are few tiny drafting points that I can flag up for you too, if others aren't already piling in with those. Let me know if you want me to do that.
Jo x
________________________________
From: A forum for discussion on midwifery and reproductive health research.
########################################################################
To unsubscribe from the MIDWIFERY-RESEARCH list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=MIDWIFERY-RESEARCH&A=1
|