Getting kicked off the program: Women's experiences of antenatal exclusion from publicly-funded homebirth in Australia.


Journal

Women and birth : journal of the Australian College of Midwives
ISSN: 1878-1799
Titre abrégé: Women Birth
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101266131

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Feb 2023
Historique:
received: 16 12 2021
revised: 09 06 2022
accepted: 20 06 2022
pubmed: 29 6 2022
medline: 25 1 2023
entrez: 28 6 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Eligibility criteria for publicly-funded homebirth models are strict and, as such, many women who initially plan a homebirth later become excluded. Fifteen publicly-funded homebirth programs are operating in Australia, offering eligible women the opportunity to give birth at home at no cost, with the care of a hospital-employed midwife. To explore the experiences of women who planned a publicly-funded homebirth and were later excluded due to pregnancy complications or risk factors. A qualitative descriptive approach was taken. Recruitment was via social media sites specifically related to homebirth in Australia. Data collection involved semi-structured telephone interviews. Transcripts were thematically analysed. Thirteen women participated. They were anxious about 'Jumping through hoops' to maintain their low-risk status. After being 'Kicked off the program', women carefully 'negotiated the system' in order to get the birth they wanted in hospital. Some women felt bullied and coerced into complying with hospital protocols that did not account for their individual needs. Maintaining the midwife-woman relationship was a protective factor, decreasing negative experiences. Women plan a homebirth to avoid the medicalised hospital environment and to gain access to continuity of midwifery care. To provide maternity care that is acceptable to women, hospital institutions need to design services that enable continuity of the midwife-woman relationship and assess risk on an individual basis. Exclusion from publicly-funded homebirth has the potential to negatively impact women who may feel a sense of loss, uncertainty or emotional distress related to their planned place of birth.

Sections du résumé

PROBLEM OBJECTIVE
Eligibility criteria for publicly-funded homebirth models are strict and, as such, many women who initially plan a homebirth later become excluded.
BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Fifteen publicly-funded homebirth programs are operating in Australia, offering eligible women the opportunity to give birth at home at no cost, with the care of a hospital-employed midwife.
AIM OBJECTIVE
To explore the experiences of women who planned a publicly-funded homebirth and were later excluded due to pregnancy complications or risk factors.
METHODS METHODS
A qualitative descriptive approach was taken. Recruitment was via social media sites specifically related to homebirth in Australia. Data collection involved semi-structured telephone interviews. Transcripts were thematically analysed.
FINDINGS RESULTS
Thirteen women participated. They were anxious about 'Jumping through hoops' to maintain their low-risk status. After being 'Kicked off the program', women carefully 'negotiated the system' in order to get the birth they wanted in hospital. Some women felt bullied and coerced into complying with hospital protocols that did not account for their individual needs. Maintaining the midwife-woman relationship was a protective factor, decreasing negative experiences.
DISCUSSION CONCLUSIONS
Women plan a homebirth to avoid the medicalised hospital environment and to gain access to continuity of midwifery care. To provide maternity care that is acceptable to women, hospital institutions need to design services that enable continuity of the midwife-woman relationship and assess risk on an individual basis.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
Exclusion from publicly-funded homebirth has the potential to negatively impact women who may feel a sense of loss, uncertainty or emotional distress related to their planned place of birth.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35764492
pii: S1871-5192(22)00109-3
doi: 10.1016/j.wombi.2022.06.008
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

e179-e185

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2023 Australian College of Midwives. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Conflict of interest None declared.

Auteurs

Rebecca Coddington (R)

Centre for Midwifery, Child and Family Health, University of Technology Sydney, Australia. Electronic address: Rebecca.Coddington@uts.edu.au.

Deborah Fox (D)

Centre for Midwifery, Child and Family Health, University of Technology Sydney, Australia. Electronic address: https://twitter.com/@debjfox.

Vanessa Scarf (V)

Centre for Midwifery, Child and Family Health, University of Technology Sydney, Australia. Electronic address: https://twitter.com/@VScarf.

Christine Catling (C)

Centre for Midwifery, Child and Family Health, University of Technology Sydney, Australia. Electronic address: https://twitter.com/@ChristineCatli1.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH