PostingGo on, blame it on us older mums

Depressing to read that mature mothers are allegedly responsible for putting pressure on maternity units. I've heard some lame excuses for the lack of NHS funding and its creaking infrastructure, but really, isn't blaming new mothers who happen to be a few years older than average scraping the bottom of the proverbial barrel? The story claims the increasing number of women giving birth in later life is putting pressure on maternity units that do not have enough specialists to deal with complications associated with older mothers. Curiously, the article omits to mention that the overall birth rate has been climbing in recent years, which might have something to do with the pressure on maternity units. Nor does it dwell on the amount of funding going into maternity care. The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists estimates that to provide safe care for all women in labour, the number of consultants needs to rise from 1,600 to 2,500 immediately, and more will be needed if the trend for women to give birth later continues. We older mums are costing the NHS because we are more likely to need a Caesarean or run into serious difficulties during delivery and so require consultants to be available. How inconsiderate of us. 

Posted 13 November 2007 22:20

Childbirth News Older mother

Comments

Louise said:

This story has made me really angry. I have 2 good friends who are midwives. One is a midwife in an area that sees lots of teen mum's and fewer older mum's. She is incredibly stressed and over-worked, NOT by the amount of older mum's having babies but the fact that there are just not enough midwives for any new mum, regardless of age and that is putting all new mothers and newborn babies under increased risk of complications. It is the government who needs to be held responsible for such pressure.

Posted 13 November 2007 22:31

Helen said:

Louise, at this rate, next the NHS will be complaining about all the sick people in the country. I have huge admiration for midwives and would love to see them get better support and conditions. It'd be better for all of us.

Posted 13 November 2007 22:57

DJ Kirkby said:

The article is selectivly correct in many respects, more staff are needed but it is not the 'fault' of increasing maternal age, simply due to a changing NHS. The term 'a leaner workforce' is being bandied about with increasing frequency. Not sure how it can get any leaner, 'skeleton staff' is already an accurate description on occasion. Perhaps the advent of Foundation Trusts will improve this situation...perhaps not. Placenta praevia is an almost entirely predictable cause of hemorrhage and is often due to women having several pregnancies rather than because they are older mums. The article is technically factual but leaves out important clarifications like that. Helen, after reading this post, I have decided that I am def doing my PhD on the issues of providing appropriate maternity care for 'older' women.

Posted 14 November 2007 06:51

Omega Mum said:

Depressing - but you should be able to get a good few pages out of it for the book - so I should simply treat it as the grist it all is. How's it all going, incidentally?

Posted 15 November 2007 17:48

Helen said:

DJ, good luck with the PhD. Should be plenty of interesting material.



Omega Mum, pegging away at it, thanks. It's getting done, but every so often I feel completely swamped by how much there is to be done and have to remind myself to take it step by step. I'm looking forwards to reading your book, you know.

Posted 15 November 2007 23:05

Qtpies7 said:

The real issue is that doctors don't want to go into that profession because malpractice insurance for OB's is more a year than they make. In some states it is almost impossible to find an OB because of that.

Which is, of course, because of sue-happy people.

Posted 17 November 2007 14:53

Liz said:

Sue-happy people. You mean those who say "Oh goody, my baby was born dead/brain-damaged, now I get that chance I always wanted to spend years going through the courts trying to get someone to take responsibility for their mess-up"? And yes, I know that sometimes bad things happen for no reason, but they also sometimes happen when they shouldn't.

Posted 18 November 2007 12:49

Helen said:

Qtpies7, Liz, not sure, but I think the NHS covers insurance costs for doctors in the UK.

Posted 18 November 2007 16:41

Liz said:

Knee-jerk reaction on my part to a complex issue - the interface between social changes, economic realities and medical safety. It is of course statistically safer to have a baby in your late 20s. Whether the Health Service can or should finance wider choices is open to different arguments.

Posted 18 November 2007 17:44

DJ Kirkby said:

Hi Helen, Ulrika is preg, she is in the 'older' mum category...

Posted 18 November 2007 20:21

potty mummy said:

Hi Helen, I may have mentioned this before (entirely possible as an older mum, over 40, and clearly no longer in posession of my marbles as I thought the NHS were there to look after us rather than tell us off like naughty children), but when I had Boy #2 I attended a sort of 'refamiliarisation course' at my local hospital for 2nd and more time mums.



The midwife taking the course (which only lasted a morning - due to staff cuts) said repeatedly; 'I love older and second time mums. (Being in Chelsea we all fell into this category). They need much less care and cause much less fuss than younger firstimers; they just get on with it.'



But then, why would the authors of this type of report pay attention to what practitioners at the sharp end think? (Sorry - am a bit miffed, as you can probably tell...)

Posted 18 November 2007 21:32

Crystal Jigsaw said:

This is so typical of today's way of thinking from a male dominated government. There is more opportunity these days for women to have a career and be successful, then start a family at a later time in their life if that is their wish. In these changing times of techno advances, wouldn't you think it doesn't matter anyway? I'm not a feminist, but I wonder how the situation would be if men gave birth. I imagine there would be an awful lot more consultants and professionals on hand then.



Crystal xx

Posted 19 November 2007 10:13

Helen said:

Liz, suppose the question is where you draw the line. Not easy to answer.



DJ, poor old Ulrika. Nice about the baby though. I really thought she'd found the right guy last time round, and now here she is with a new bloke! I hope this one works out for her.

Posted 19 November 2007 12:14

debio said:

In truth I suspect older Mums do cost the NHS more. I was offered so many tests and examinations - many of which I refused - merely because I was a first-timer in mid-thirties.



I also had my daughter by c-section because I was too small and she was too big. I like to think that would have been the case were I nineteen or twenty.



But - up until then I had paid enough tax to settle the debt of a Third World nation and had never had cause - luckily - to use the NHS.



I had the option to pay privately but was advised that the NHS was the better route.



This article has really hacked me off.



Hope the book is coming together!

Posted 19 November 2007 13:28

Helen said:

Potty Mummy, suspect older mums are a convenient scapegoat for the many problems in the NHS. 'Refamiliarisation' - crikey! Sounds scary...

Posted 19 November 2007 14:24

Helen said:

Crystal Jigsaw, have often suspected the entire childbirth experience would be very different if universal rather than purely female. For starters, we'd get less of the 'Buck up gel! So your body's ripped apart. What's your problem?' line. I delivered a 10lb 2oz baby vaginally and the attitude I got afterwards was sickening.

Posted 19 November 2007 14:30

Helen said:

Debio, now that's a good point. Us older mums will have paid loads more tax by the time we come to have our babies. Seems only fair we get some pay-back on all that investment! Glad you got the C Section it sounds like you needed. I had to plough on with a 'normal' delivery that turned into carnage.

Posted 19 November 2007 14:32

cb said:

I have some insight into why the NHS wastes money on "older mums" - part of it has to do with the stereotypes in the medical profession itself. I had my first child at 42 and wanted to give birth in the midwifery unit, but they were worried that there would be complications because of my age and wanted to give me every test and scan to think of to come up with reasons why I should have to deliver in the hospital. Well both my son and I passed everyone of them and in the end they refused to let me birth in the midwife unit because of a high bmi (it was the best they could come up with) and thought I might have "soft tissue distoxia" (i.e. I was too fat and the baby might get stuck on the way out!). Well, in the end my son was born happy and healthy, and naturally after a short 5 hours labour and we went home the next day (wanted to go home that night, but they wouldn't let us) - the hospital midwife even commented that it was one of the "easiest" births she'd seen. What a waste of resources that we didn't even want - if only they'd trusted to women's natural ability to give birth at any age, it would have saved the NHS money and given us a much better experience.

Posted 18 December 2007 07:52

Helen said:

Hi CB, reading your story does make me wonder if our own beliefs affect the nature of the delivery. It sounds as if you were able to be confident in your own body, and your body responded by doing what is was designed to do.

Posted 18 December 2007 12:43

Post a comment

Enter your comment here.

You can use some html tags such as <b> and <i>.

Word verification

Name

Email (will not be made public)

Website (optional)

Remember me