 |
 |
Agree re Jehovah Witness. To me it is great example of a belief system that sees every birth as risky and therefore should happen in an obstetric unit. In this case, it is not the woman's history or physiology but her religious belief that is the risk! Best wishes, Denis Dr Denis Walsh Associate Professor in Midwifery Postgraduate Director of Research & Knowledge Transfer Academic Division of Midwifery University of Nottingham A Floor Medical School Queens Medical Centre Derby Rd Nottingham NG7 2UH Tel: +44(0)115 8230987 Mobile: 07905735777 Email: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> From: A forum for discussion on midwifery and reproductive health research. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Deborah Davis Sent: 12 April 2013 01:57 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: criteria for inclusion in birth centres Hi there, this is a hoary old issue and I know this group has been asked the same question previously (though I think it was a long time ago) so my apologies. I would greatly appreciate it if anyone who had a list of inclusion/exclusion criteria for birth centre care, could email it to me (perhaps outside of the list). Our centre is co-located in the same building as tertiary services but i would be interested in criteria for stand alone centres also. Also, has anyone ever heard of women of the Jehovah's Witness faith being excluded? I am fairly outraged by this one because as far as i know this is not an illness! Deborah Davis Adjunct Professor of Midwifery University of Technology, Sydney Professor of Midwifery University of Canberra Bruce, 2601 ACT. Australia ________________________________ From: A forum for discussion on midwifery and reproductive health research. [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Sandall, Jane [[log in to unmask]] Sent: Sunday, 7 April 2013 2:00 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: FW: Standardised tool for reviewing perinatal losses Dear Colleagues If you are UK based, please could you contact Tracey directly. many thanks Jane Sandall Jane Sandall Professor of Women's Health Division of Women's Health, King's College London Women's Health Academic Centre King's Health Partners 10th Floor, North Wing, St. Thomas' Hospital, Westminster Bridge Road London SE1 7EH http://www.kcl.ac.uk/medicine/research/divisions/wh/index.aspx Tel: 020 7188 8149 Fax: 020 7620 1227 e-mail:[log in to unmask] Skype: jsandall http://www.kcl.ac.uk/campuslife/campuses/stthomas/StThomas.aspx PA [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> Tel: 020 7188 3639 ________________________________ From: BMFMS [[log in to unmask]] Sent: 05 April 2013 09:29 To: BMFMS Cc: [log in to unmask] Subject: Standardised tool for reviewing perinatal losses Dear colleagues, I am currently chairing a Task and Finish group (on behalf of BMFMS) tasked with developing a standardised tool for reviewing perinatal losses. Part of this entails identifying any such tools already being used in the UK to look at perinatal losses in a standardised way. We already have the NPSA tool for reviewing intrapartum related deaths (part of the intrapartum toolkit), SCOR (developed by the West Midlands Perinatal Institute), the tool developed by Devender Roberts and her colleagues at Liverpool Women's Hospital, and the Scottish data collection that has been utilised for some years (not SCOR). My request is that if there are any other tools in use, could you please contact me on [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> so that any existing proformas etc can feed into the development of the new system. I will also be at the conference in Dublin so feel free to talk to me there, and please come along to the Friday lunctime symposium (12.30-1.30), sponsored by Sands. Many thanks Tracey Johnston Honorary Secretary, BMFMS ________________________________ This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Unless otherwise stated, any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG). If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you must neither take any action based upon its contents, nor copy or show it to anyone. Please contact the sender if you believe you have received this email in error. The RCOG may monitor, analyse and archive email traffic, data and the content of email for the purposes of security, legal compliance and staff training. RCOG is a registered charity in England & Wales (No. 213280) Web: www.rcog.org.uk <http://www.rcog.org.uk> ________________________________ UTS CRICOS Provider Code: 00099F DISCLAIMER: This email message and any accompanying attachments may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, use, disseminate, distribute or copy this message or attachments. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender expressly, and with authority, states them to be the views of the University of Technology Sydney. Before opening any attachments, please check them for viruses and defects. Think. Green. Do. Please consider the environment before printing this email. This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee and may contain confidential information. If you have received this message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it. Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nottingham. This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your computer system: you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.