My thoughts and ideas
The post discusses the importance of practitioners being skilled in vaginal breech birth, highlighting the ethical implications of stating, “I don’t do vaginal breech birth.” It emphasizes that women often lack control over their birthing circumstances and need competent care providers to ensure safe delivery, advocating for comprehensive training and skill development in maternity care.
The article reviews a recent paper on fetal monitoring during labor by Richmond et al. which lacks a reference list, undermining its educational value. While it identifies some correct points about fetal heart rate interpretations, it perpetuates outdated practices and fails to acknowledge the need for consent in monitoring, thus serving more as promotional content than genuine education.
When is fetal monitoring not fetal monitoring? #EFM #CTG #LanguageMatters
There is a lack discussion surrounding the unconsented use of women’s clinical data for CTG analysis training in AI. Women should know when and how their data is being used, and benefit from their data use when corporations profit from it.
In 1910, suffragist Helen Todd highlighted the importance of women’s voting rights for improving working conditions, coining the phrase “Bread for all, and Roses too.” While maternity services focus on physical health (Bread), there is a pressing need to enhance women’s emotional and experiential birth outcomes (Roses), fostering joy and meaning in the process.
Prevalence-induced concept change is a psychological phenomenon where the meaning of a concept shifts due to declining frequency of related events. Over time, the definition of “high risk” in maternity care has expanded despite reduced perinatal mortality, leading to shifts in CTG usage.
2024 was a big year for me. And 2025 looks set to be even more amazing! This is what I got up to this year, and what I have planned for the next.
This week I explore flawed beliefs in the effectiveness of fetal monitoring technology through a circular argument. It highlights three steps: assuming success when bad outcomes don’t occur, blaming individuals when they do, and declaring some cases unavoidable. It’s time the research to settle this was done.
From time to time, I encounter women saying some version of “I’ll only have (insert birth intervention here) if it is medically indicated“. I completely understand the sense in which this is meant – that if something bad is highly likely to happen, and the proposed intervention is highly likely to stop that bad thing happening, then it makes sense to choose the intervention. People use this language as short […]
The third part of a series critiquing common myths about fetal heart rate monitoring. It emphasises that fetal monitoring is not essential for good outcomes, and intermittent auscultation IS fetal monitoring.
Birth Small Talk 