 |
 |
Can someone who was involved in the Maternity Services Review in England please provide a link to the actual report. The way it is being reported suggests that women who are at low risk will be given £3,000 personal budgets to spend on paying independent midwives or companies like Neighbourhood Midwives or One-to-one Midwifery for private midwifery care at home or in private midwifery units. If so, what is the evidence? The findings of Birthplace related not midwifery care by salaries NHS staff. If the reporting is wrong, is something being done to put it right? See below Alison From: Scott-Samuel, Alex [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Sent: 23 February 2016 15:29 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: [POHG] Fwd: Women to be offered their own £3,000 'birth budgets' Begin forwarded message: From: OurNHS openDemocracy <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> Date: 23 February 2016 15:17:39 GMT To: John Lister <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> Cc: "Scott-Samuel, Alex" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>, "<[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>, "[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>, "fph inequalities group" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>, Keep Our NHS Public Merseyside <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>, KONP SG <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>, "[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>, "[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>, NHS Momentum <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> Subject: Re: Women to be offered their own £3,000 'birth budgets' With his kind permission, John's excellent reaction is published more or less unedited, here: https://opendemocracy.net/ournhs/john-lister/maternity-review-nothing-more-than-pretext-for-privatisation please do share widely. let's put some pressure on! and if others want to offer other pieces in reaction, I'd still be keen to publish more. thanks all c On 23 February 2016 at 13:39, John Lister <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: The so-called "independent" review of maternity services chaired by Tory peer Baroness Cumberlege has predictably shown itself to be nothing more than a pretext for privatisation. Its proposals would fragment an already over-stretched midwifery workforce, take vital funding away from mainstream maternity services, and potentially force more NHS maternity services to close or centralise, bringing more anguish to women who would have to travel further to give birth. The proposal to fragment maternity services by giving pregnant women a £3,000 'personal budget' to spend as they wish is indeed a formula for chaos and destabilising core maternity services. The obvious danger is that as women are given funding to spend as they wish on "one-to-one midwifery", more and more midwives will be encouraged opt out of high-pressure work on busy maternity wards, and opt instead to offer services privately. It's no surprise that Baroness Cumberlege, who runs a company that promotes and profits from privatisation and the chaotic 'reforms' forced through under Tory Health Secretary Andrew Lansley, should advocate a policy that would encourage small scale private provision of services for women with uncomplicated pregnancies, at the expense of the NHS provision for those with more complex needs. It is bizarre to see the Royal College of Midwives, which only four months ago was complaining that overstretched and under-staffed maternity units across the country were closing their doors for lack of staff, has for some reason welcomed these latest proposals, which in the current climate of frozen and inadequate NHS funding can only make matters worse. RCM chief Executive Cathy Warwick said she was 'delighted' with the plans, but went on to warn that more midwives would be needed - despite the fact that there would be no extra money in the pot to pay for any additional staff. The proposal has all the disadvantages of other "personal budget" and "NHS voucher" schemes - in that it opens the way to individual "top-up" payments, widespread full-scale charging for health care, and private health insurance. Like personal budgets it would take money from core budgets for services, without evidence or systems to ensure it will be spent appropriately - and leaving an under-resourced service to deal with all the more demanding cases - and those that develop later complications. The NHS England statement explicitly says that any woman needing urgent care because of complications would get it regardless of whether their personal budget had been spent. This policy is as illogical and unrealistic as the government claims that an NHS that is already billions in deficit, and facing cuts to balance the books, can implement 7-day working with no extra staff or funding. In this case the main beneficiary is likely to be a newly created private sector midwifery service, run by NHS-trained midwives who might otherwise be delivering NHS care in NHS units or in the community, free of charge at point of use. On 23/02/2016 13:34, Scott-Samuel, Alex wrote: fyi From: "Scott-Samuel, Alex" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> Date: 23 February 2016 13:28:24 GMT To: "[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> Subject: Delivering the Forward View: the CCG Improvement and Assessment Framework The number of personal health budgets taken up should not be a performance criterion for CCGs. There is no evidence that personal health budgets benefit the health of users. When the Department's evaluation of personal health budgets was independently evaluated in a peer-reviewed publication from Kings College London, its optimistic conclusions regarding the benefits of PHBs were shown to be false. This publication adds further peer-reviewed evidence: http://pcwww.liv.ac.uk/~alexss/personalhealthbudgets.pdf<http://pcwww.liv.ac.uk/%7Ealexss/personalhealthbudgets.pdf> yours sincerely, Alex Scott-Samuel (Dr) On 23 Feb 2016, at 11:51, "Gaynor Lloyd" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: couldn't agree more. It seems to be a thing with ex Health Minister Baronesses, like the NHS Direct likely stitched up by Bottomley's Odgers, fresh from the fee they got for recruiting Simon Stevens. And CCG's to be "marked" higher for number of personal health budgets they achieve https://www.england.nhs.uk/commissioning/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2016/02/CCG-IAF-engagement-document.pdf page 8 From: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Raymond Tallis Sent: 23 February 2016 11:36 To: 'Alan Taman'; 'Scott-Samuel, Alex' Cc: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>; 'fph inequalities group'; 'Keep Our NHS Public Merseyside'; 'KONP SG'; [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>; [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>; 'NHS Momentum' Subject: RE: Women to be offered their own £3,000 'birth budgets' Dear All, The conclusion of the report is not the slightest bit surprising given the key role of snout-in-trough Baroness Cumberlege. It is a boon for the privateers. Best wishes Ray From: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Alan Taman Sent: 23 February 2016 11:30 To: Scott-Samuel, Alex <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> Cc: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>; fph inequalities group <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>; Keep Our NHS Public Merseyside <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>; KONP SG <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>; [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>; [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>; NHS Momentum <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> Subject: Re: Women to be offered their own £3,000 'birth budgets' What concerns me, as a PR professional, is the need 'competing' services will now have to address in enticing women to use them: marketing costs money. Lots of it, on this scale. Where does that come out of? Also the need to out-bid one another to secure the service in the first place. What a splendid mis-appopriation of public funds that could have gone into making maternity services safer, instead of more 'appealing'. Alan Taman<http://www.alantaman.co.uk/> 07870 757 309 [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 11:24 AM, Scott-Samuel, Alex <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: [https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/509379218976014336/fGIA-0Td_normal.jpeg] Alex Scott-Samuel (@buzhna<https://twitter.com/buzhna?refsrc=email>) 23/02/2016 11:17<https://twitter.com/buzhna/status/702089887332364288?refsrc=email> Don't be fooled: personal health budgets are all about preparing the NHS for co-payments, insurance & privatisation bbc.co.uk/news/health-35...<https://t.co/ofhsPcsdIt> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "KONP SG" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>. To post to this group, send email to [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>. To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/konp-sg/7A7B1E65-14F1-4698-8276-5B63954A55B7%40liverpool.ac.uk<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/konp-sg/7A7B1E65-14F1-4698-8276-5B63954A55B7%40liverpool.ac.uk?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "KONP SG" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>. To post to this group, send email to [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>. To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/konp-sg/CAEXW8RQPjPW957krt_Ge_T7WpyU6rAd%2Byu47zd8%2BXKi3Bt%3Dkmw%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "KONP SG" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>. To post to this group, send email to [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>. To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/konp-sg/000801d16e2e%245e79b300%241b6d1900%24%40rtallis.wanadoo.co.uk. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "KONP SG" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>. To post to this group, send email to [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>. To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/konp-sg/012801d16e30%2490d63ce0%24b282b6a0%24%40co.uk. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "KONP SG" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>. To post to this group, send email to [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>. To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/konp-sg/D057AD7E-C64E-483E-B38C-FAB5621185E5%40liverpool.ac.uk. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "KONP SG" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>. To post to this group, send email to [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>. To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/konp-sg/56CC6111.6060800%40healthemergency.org.uk<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/konp-sg/56CC6111.6060800%40healthemergency.org.uk?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. ************************************ Politics of Health Group Mail List Messages ************************************ Visit the PoHG website for lots of interesting links and publications: http://www.pohg.org.uk/ Visit PoHG on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/282761111845400 Follow us on Twitter: @pohguk You can subscribe to / unsubscribe from the PoHG mail list here: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/POHG [fblogo][fblogo.gif]<https://www.facebook.com/282761111845400>