Hi Labour! Thanks for asking. This is what we want for maternity in your manifesto please!

High-quality maternity care for all, free at the point of need, funded to Western European standards and above. Get rid of the internal market and focus funds on frontline staff.

 Immediate removal of the charge to migrant mums

The restoration of the Bursary for midwives and nurses and related professions.

Increased funding and support for the university courses training midwives, initially and throughout their working lives.

Increased neo natal beds.

Significantly improve support for women postnatally: physically emotionally and in terms of mental health

Reinstate breastfeeding support to allow women to choose to breastfeed

Provide good quality mental health support

No women to give birth in prison.

No private companies bidding for midwifery work.

End the  personal budgets  routine.

Respect for women in all aspects of childbirth.

Major research to reduce inductions.

Not one more closure of a maternity unit, nor one bed lost.

Make the UK the safest place on earth to give birth. Its not even in the top ten at present. In 2017 in the UK, 1,267 babies who were born after 24 weeks’ gestation died in their first 28 days of life. ( Bliss) Cuba has better outcomes than the UK https://edition.cnn.com/2018/02/20/health/unicef-newborn-deaths-by-country-study/index.html

Ask all the EU midwives to please, please stay.

Birth close to home is best for mother baby and the family. No more nonsense about it being ok to travel for four hours in labour

Improve ambulance services for maternity

Support home births, understanding that this is not a cheap option and will always need obstetric backup

Research and action to stop the greater risk of maternal death  to BAME mums and to significantly the numbers of BAME babies dying at birth

Reverse the terrible trend where more babies are dying under one

Focus on women’s health and reduce the number of years women live with ill health

Tackle endometriosis. Tackle extreme period pain. Tackle painful menopause Tackle infertility.

Make the NHS focus on women’s health, research into drug effects on women, and make sure the differences in women’s symptoms are well understood

Improve abortion rights

Reverse all cuts in health vistor services and reinstae a full national service for all

Fund IVF

Improve the NHS insurance system for maternity

Protect the genome projects from private companies

End the mother penalty on pay. Stop discrimination against pregnant women.

Fund our whole NHS to Western European standards, and free it from the plague of privatisation and rationing

Save Liverpool Women’s hospital, on-site. Fund Liverpool Women’s Hospital so it can thrive, to serve women and babies locally and nationally and to continue to be a centre of world expertise

Defend NHS Maternity Services Report 2

Jessica Ormerod speaks for maternity services as a public good.

Thank you for inviting me to speak to you today. My name is Jessica Ormerod. I run a research and policy analysis organisation called Public Matters with my lovely friend and colleague Deborah Harrington. We write mainly about the NHS but we are interested in all public services and keeping those service publicly owned and accountable. We also run an All Party Parliamentary Group for Health in All Policies. At the moment we are completing an inquiry into the Work and Welfare Reform Act. We see parallels across all public services in a systematic transformation (a word we hear all too often these days) to a corporate structure, a reduction in NHS provision and an ever widening landscape for private companies to move in and ‘fill in the gaps’.

I know I have spoken to some of you before but I think it’s really important for us to understand the picture of what has happened to our NHS as a whole. Because every closed maternity ward, service or reduction in staff is the direct result of changes to the NHS that have been happening since the 2012 Health and Social Care Act. These changes are having a devastating impact on access to care. It is no exaggeration to say that we are witnessing the reversal of 70 years of universal, comprehensive and equitable care.

The 2012 Health and Social Care Act put into place all the major elements for a step change in the privatisation of the NHS.

A QUANGO called NHS England was formed as the Commissioner-in-Chief of the service, with over 200 subordinate local commissioning units. These commissioning units broke with the tradition of planning services, replacing it with buying in from public, private and voluntary sector providers. Areas of work are subdivided into contractable units and NHS public providers are obliged to compete. The loss of a contract means loss of income, which has a knock-on effect on the viability of the public sector, which is left with high cost acute care and a reduced income.  

In 2014 a new CEO was appointed to run the NHS in England. He created a new plan for the NHS, the Five Year Forward View and this was greeted by the establishment as a welcome antidote to what was seen as the fragmented mess left by the 2012 Act (this was only a mere 18 months on from it being enacted). But it’s important to recognize that far from being an accident, the Act achieved the fragmentation necessary for privatisation to be embedded at an organisational level, including many major health industry players taking key roles in the commissioning and policy-making process.  

At the heart of NHS England’s Five Year Forward View is the idea that the NHS in England will never again be funded to a level that maintains its services in the way they are run now. It puts together a series of proposals for change which are not just cuts but are about a fundamental reshaping of how services are provided. Expensive specialist and emergency care are relocated to centralised hubs and more care is to be delivered in the community via partnerships with local authorities. There is an aspiration for fewer emergency admissions with an improvement to overall health which it argues will lead to less dependency on NHS services. 

We could say the scope of this aspiration is far reaching or we could say it is pie in the sky. It not only assumes the NHS can cope with a growing population without corresponding growth in services but that it will do so with a reduced service with much of the change becoming the responsibility of local authorities. 

The process of transforming the NHS in England, is based on close co-operation between successive politicians and Department of Health managers over many years with the US Health Maintenance Organisation or Accountable Care Organization principles of managed care. This process is continuing without any checks and balances of substance within the formal organisational structures of government. Politicians go to great lengths to deny both privatisation and US influence on the current changes. 

There is, however, a groundswell of resistance to the damage being done to the NHS and there is a lot of knowledge surrounding individual service contractions and closures, but little in the public domain about the overall programme of change. And that is what I am here to talk about today.

The National Maternity Review, aka Better Births – A Five Year Forward View for Maternity Care, is one of the Five Year Forward View’s New Models of Care. It emphasises community care delivered through local hubs with a theoretical reduced demand on hospital services. It recommends an increase in independent sector providers and introduces Personal Care Maternity Budgets. Personal Care Budgets commoditise and monetise the system. They add layers of unnecessary complication, increase expense, fragment accountability and lead to an accounting nightmare.

44 Local Maternity Systems have been established. The systems have been introduced without consultation, peer review, pilot studies or effective oversight from public health or parliamentary scrutiny. They are small-scale Integrated Care Systems. Unlike the Integrated Care Organisations which are now under consultation, they have been put into place with very little fanfare or institutional opposition.

As with all the changes to the NHS currently taking place, there is a real problem that rhetoric about better care closer to home is not matched by real resources or access to physical structures like hospitals. NHS England consistently refers to services being more important than organisations but fail to fill in the blanks about how this works. They also insist that travelling in order to receive excellent care is not a concern to patients. There is no acknowledgment that time, expense and severity of health condition all very much effect the distance people are able to travel regardless of the excellence of the service at the end of the journey.

In the case of maternity, these questions of distance and the emphasis on community care run two different risks. The first being the potential for increase of emergencies outside hospital setting. The second is that mothers might be taken in to hospital for assisted birth or caesarean in order to pre-empt risk arising.

But what makes maternity different from other services?

Most people use health services most at the beginning and end of their lives. Pregnant women are the exception to this. During pregnancy women come into more contact with the NHS than they probably have ever done in their lives. This is particularly the case if they have a complicated pregnancy or birth. Healthy women can become profoundly unwell during pregnancy and they can be vulnerable to life-threatening complications during birth. That’s why it is so important that women have all levels of care within easy access.

Until now maternity services have been provided in the most part by the NHS. Women have always been free to employ a private midwife. But the NHS has a duty to provide a midwife at every birth even if a private midwife is also in attendance.

Maternity services are woven through the traditional structure of the NHS. Women see their midwife at home or at their local GP. They receive a minimum of two scans to check the baby’s progress and health at the local hospital. If they have a pre-existing condition or they develop a pregnancy-related illness then their specialist will work alongside the maternity team to ensure that the woman and baby are safe and as healthy as possible throughout the pregnancy.

Currently women – depending on where they live – can give birth at home, in a ‘stand-alone’ facility run by midwives, ‘co-located midwifery unit’ – that’s a midwife-run facility on hospital grounds, or in an obstetric unit which includes doctors and surgical theatre. Obstetric units can only be sited in hospitals with A&E because they require acute services which is blood, air and surgeons. A woman can become dangerously ill very quickly during birth so timely access to acute care is essential.

Put this into the context that since 2010 maternity services have been starved of funds and there has been a staff recruitment and retention crisis. Many maternity units have already been downgraded or closed, hundreds of GP practices have also closed so women already travel further to receive care. This means it costs more and takes more time to see a midwife, GP or hospital doctor. It also means longer emergency transfer times. The risk is this will only get worse once the STPs restructuring of the NHS is complete.

Who is driving the changes to maternity? 

Surprise, surprise, Better Births panel includes private health providers and those private companies are working with government to re-write policy.

Although most current providers are NHS hospitals, private providers are now being strongly encouraged. Local Maternity Systems set their own payment systems. This means that they can choose whether they pay via their geographical population or they can pay per activity or service. However, they do not follow established budget areas; they do not share boundaries with CCGs or Local Authorities even though they rely on budgets from both. Across the country there is now a mish-mash of payment systems. The risk is that women will fall through the gaps.

NHS Trusts have been ‘incentivised’ to adopt Better Births by offering a chance to win ‘pioneer funding’ to speed up the transition to the New Models of Care. In November 2016, Seven ‘early adopter’ sites started to implement the recommendations – I don’t need tell you about this because you’re part of it! The sites were told to be bold and radical. Another incentive is ‘the maternity challenge fund’ which instructs successful trusts ‘to explore innovative ways to use women’s and their partners’ feedback to improve maternity services’. A pioneer site is not the same as a pilot test site.

LMSs are encouraged to work alongside private providers in order to offer women a wider choice. As most women have previously been cared for by the NHS this simply means opening the door to the private sector. In a climate of serious staff shortages, it is possible that some midwives may see the benefit of setting up an independent midwifery practice rather than staying in the NHS. Despite protestations to the contrary, this does actually reduce the ‘NHS offer’ and opens an income stream for public money to be handed over to the private sector.

Better Births tells us it is working on a new accreditation scheme for maternity providers. But in a publicly provided NHS service, this is unnecessary because the NHS trains staff to a professional standard.

Private providers are required to have a contract with the NHS in order to receive payment via a Personal Care Budget. It is claimed that the budgets (which are described as ‘notional’) will demonstrate to CCGs the kinds of choices women make during pregnancy, birth and postnatally. This will apparently encourage CCGs to respond to women by increasing their offer. The claim is that this will also empower women. But it is decidedly unclear about how this can be achieved. The guidance talks about using Personal Care Budgets for birth pools, place of birth settings or breastfeeding support but all of this should be available to every woman regardless of a personal care budget. In fact, all of these used to be available to women as part of the normal care given by the NHS.

Moreover, it precludes the notion that women become ill in pregnancy. No one chooses to get gestational diabetes, pre-eclampsia, HELLP or any other life-threatening condition. What happens when your health needs change but you’ve used up your £3000 on hypno-birthing? There should be real concern about the potential lack of access to obstetric care when women have serious complications of pregnancy. Or to return to the issue of financial balance, if £3000 is a notional budget for a normal birth which can be used up in a number of ways then the acute hospital will potentially have to pick up the cost of the emergency care without a matching budget.

What does this all mean?

Scale and pace have taken precedence over caution and evidence. Academic research will take years to catch up to establish the public health consequences of this new policy.

This is a top-down reorganisation of a national service with little to no consultation, pilot schemes, peer review, oversight or risk assessment. A Health Select Committee inquiry into the maternity transformation plan was not completed because of the 2017 election. It has not been re-opened.

The Vice-Chair of the maternity transformation programme finishes his report with the following advice to LMSs: Be Bold! Don’t wait for instruction! Clearly long gone are the years of epidemiological study, of public health planning, of consultation with experts.

However, there is one area that is getting a lot of investment and that’s technology. In 2018 all 44 local maternity systems were asked to supply data to NHS England on the level of their digital capacity. There is a drive across the NHS towards increasing the amount of technology. This can mean more efficient record keeping in hospitals and GP surgeries, it can mean improved tools to cancer care all of which are good and to be applauded. But we are also seeing technology replacing face to face care; already women see a midwife far less regularly than she would have done even five years ago. One area of major concern is in the changeover from paper records to e records. We already know that there are serious barriers to access for many people when they are forced to use technology. The claim is that women will be able to take better ‘ownership’ of their ‘personalised care’ but in reality a paper booklet kept by a woman in her own handbag is far easier to access than erecords locked in a computer that she may not have or may not know how to use.

Better Births is based on consumer choice issues around personalised maternity care. There is a serious lack of evidence that this restructuring will give women the vital services they need. There are fewer services, obstetric departments are being stretched even further and technology is replacing face-to-face clinical care.

On the other hand, it embeds private care and fee-for-service. And, most importantly of all this is not how a national public service works.

Defend NHS Maternity Services National Meeting Report 1.

Rebecca Smythe Senior lecturer in Midwifery Opening our National Meeting.
Video courtesy of Phil Maxwell and Hazuan Hashim

Maternity services in the NHS are over stretched and underfunded. Maternity Units are under threat or closing across the land. Temporary closures are common. Staff are keeping the service afloat so most mothers and babies are still safely delivered.But serious damage is now showing in the research from Liverpool University into deaths of babies in the UK, especially in areas of high poverty.

On 5th October 2019 October we met at the Friends meeting house in Liverpool to discuss the national state of the maternity services. We gathered people to hear Professor Wendy Savage, eminent doctor, Jessica Ormerod Researcher, from Public Matters, and Rayah Feldman from Maternity Action. We started with this video from Rebecca Smythe who teaches Midwifery in Manchester and was once a midwife at Liverpool Women’s Hospital and at Mill Road Hospital . Rebecca spoke of the realities and the hopes of mid wives and student midwives.

This was our agenda

Aims To discuss the state of NHS maternity services nationally and to work out how to improve them, including how to involve women, staff , the wider  trade union movement, and the public in this campaign

Agenda for the day

10-11am Registration, coffee


11.00 Chair’s welcome & order of the day

11.05-11.15 – Video message from Rebecca Smyth, senior lecture in midwifery, SLWH campaign (sadly  Rebecca is out of the country, hence the video message) dealing with issues facing midwives

11.15 -11.40 – Professor Wendy Savage (including the battle for a women-centred NHS)

11.40-12 –Jessica Ormerod (‘Better Births’ & the Cumberledge agenda, Rhetoric v Reality)

12- 12.45 – Q & A & discussion from the floor with the panel

12.345-1.30 LUNCH –lunch provided, some flexibility to shorten if running late


1.30.-2 00pm Chair introduces Rayah Feldman, Maternity Action campaign on migrant charges

2- pm 2.50 – Breakout groups discussing  

Campaigning successes 

Reaching wider audiences

What next

2.50-3.10 Tea break

3.15- Building the campaign to defend and improve NHS maternity services, improve women’s health care services, defend infant and child health services and defend and reinstate the NHS4.00 Chair’s close & thanks

We will share reports from the rest of the meeting over the next few days

The NHS comes from the People and belongs to the People

A year ago Save Liverpool Women’s Hospital Campaign held our second demonstration. We campaign for our mothers, daughters, sisters, friends and lovers and for each and every baby. We campaign for a fully funded NHS, for improved healthcare for women and babies and for the hospital to remain open and on its existing garden site.

Continue reading “The NHS comes from the People and belongs to the People”

Maternity Care is for the mother and baby, it is no place to be making profit.

Women can give birth at home in Liverpool using the NHS.

There is no sane case for commissioning another private for profit Maternity provider. This idea of bringing in yet another for profit provider was raised, in passing, at a health and social care select committee meeting in Liverpool this week. It follows the One to One company closing and causing significant hardship to pregnant women and to the midwives working for them.

Continue reading “Maternity Care is for the mother and baby, it is no place to be making profit.”

Speak up even if your voice breaks

Speak out for the NHS. Speak out for proper funding, proper staffing, decent buildings and for democratic control. Democracy means the government of the people, for the people by the people, with the right to speak out and speak up. The NHS, it is said, will last as long as there are people prepared to fight for it. Good care is still provided in may aspects of the NHS but the system is suffering significant damage. If enough of us speak out and mobilise in our workplaces and communities, we can save and improve the NHS. This is no time for despair or helplessness.

Continue reading “Speak up even if your voice breaks”