Myth Busting #2: CTG misinterpretation harms babies
Does CTG misinterpretation harm babies? Or is something else going on?
Writing
Words have power
Words have power. I know this – the approach I used for my doctoral research requires you to look closely at how language shapes the social world. If you have hung around the birth world for a bit, you have probably made some conscious choices about whether you use the words “patient” and “delivery”. I spend most of my working week choosing which words work best to get the job […]
High risk obstetrics and high risk women: a wee rant about language
“High risk” is a term that gets tossed around a lot in maternity services. Have you ever stopped to think about what is being hidden under the surface when it is used?
Reviewing the evidence for Intermittent Auscultation
I was excited to see a new paper, setting out the evidence for intermittent auscultation in labour (Anderson, et al., 2023). It was published in a journal for US based nurse-midwives, so it relates to the context of care in that country. Let’s see how they did in terms of getting the facts right. Is their evidence accurate? They wrote that: All this is correct, except that one of the […]
What does a ChatBot have to say about CTG monitoring?
Has a #ChatBot taken over my blog? Would you notice if it did?
CTG monitoring is NOT mandatory: A request to writers
This is my regular reminder that CTG monitoring is a choice. Write like you believe this is true.
Birth Small Talk 