Fructus Ventris

But I'm a little mystified on how ob-gyn's can be cheaper than nurse-midwives. Are mothers choosing doctors in preference to midwives? Is this an education issue? How does the government save money by employing what must be more expensive resources?

I couldn't access the article, but I am continually surprised that Midwivery, which is far less expensive care and well as being far superior, isn't seen as such by the Health Care powers that be.

On a side note, I learned today that a lesser know word for midwivery is tokology. Did you know that?

That action makes no sense. They need to examine the number of midwife-attended births that require a MD and relax their policies. Also, is it normal for the clinic to pay the midwife for their day off on the following day? I used a midwife for my prenatal visits and my labor and she was back at work at 8:30 am after my 12 am birth. She left my house before 3 am. My hope is that the mothers who utilize the midwives will demand a change in this policy. I'd be pretty ticked off it were me.

user registration is required to access the page, unfortunately :(

God Bless.

Money, money, money, money... muh-neh! (Can you hear me singing the O'Jays?)

The trick here is to mobilize the grassroots, the die is cast and the strawman erected by medibusiness is burning.

I thought it was Dr. Teeth who sang "money money money money money".

I'm livid. I'm absolutely livid. I used that practice in the past, but I'm not going to any longer. Did they ask even one woman whether she preferred having a midwife during her entire labor versus an unknown doctor swooping in for the final fifteen minutes?

Every midwife in that practice has given me a hug. Not one of the doctors ever so much as shook my hand. This is me shaking the dust from my feet (after I write a letter to the editor.)

I found the song. It's here:
http://www.patchmonkey.net/wordpress/2005/09/25/1982/

This decision was made because of the doctors and not the midwives. The article doesn't mention the c-section rates, the patient satisfaction, or any other standards of care. Just that they want to save $$$$$ by eliminating the midwife-attended births.

Something like this happened here about 9 years ago when I was 4 weeks away from delivering. I ran, as best I could being 8 months pregnant, to a different practice where midwives would be delivering. So did 80% of the patients at the practice. It was a really bad decision, and it took YEARS for the practice to recover. Meanwhile, the midwives found other, better jobs, and one opened her own practice. Financial people often underestimate the attachment women have to the midwives who care for them.

I couldn't read the article, not being registered, but as for myself, I'll never go back to an OB-GYN without a compelling medical reason. Though my first two were born in hospitals, the births were attended by midwives and went very smoothly indeed. This time I'm having a homebirth and I feel so comfortable and confident about the whole process.

There are always going to be women who want to see a doctor -- I can't see why the doctors should feel threatened by homebirths. MY having my baby at home means that the doctors will be able to focus on the more high-risk deliveries that need their expertise.

Alicia commented just now that "this happens all the time." In 1997 just after we moved to a middle sized Oregon Town (actually a pair of towns) the exact same thing happened at a practice that A had interviewed at. They actually pulled one Midwife out of a Hospital mid labor to tell her of her termination. They let the recently hired Female MD (OBGYN) be the "front person" to handle the public outcry.

They also lost at least 80% of patients and both of the Midwives struck out successfully on their own.

"Burstein said obstetricians at the Nashua clinic perform more surgeries than they do deliveries, another reason for retaining the doctors and taking the nurse-midwives off the call schedule."

Wait--doesn't this mean that the midwifery practice is working?!? That the OBs are focusing on their specialty--high-risk and surgical, and the midwives taking care of the rest (at a lower cost, I would assume)? How will this help cut cost? Or are they going to turn every delivery into a surgery, so as to get more reimbursment? Ugh.

--Amanda

Well, I've fired off my nastygram....er, letter to the editor, and I hope they'll publish it.

Those guys at the paper published a letter today from a woman saying we have no right to complain. After all, if SHE delivered her babies with unknown doctors in a military hospital, then WE who want pampering and hand-holding can surely purchase that right for ourselves rather than making the medical world do it for us.

Such arrogance and ignorance, all in 350 words. I was impressed.