Twenty-five years since the Shearman Report: How far have we come? Are we there yet?

被引:5
作者
Catling, Christine J. [1 ]
Homer, Caroline S. E. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Technol Sydney, Fac Hlth, Ctr Midwifery Child & Family Hlth, Level 7,UTS Bldg 10,Jones St, Sydney, NSW 2007, Australia
关键词
The Shearman Report; Maternity reports; New South Wales; Australia; Maternity services; MATERNITY CARE; CASELOAD MIDWIFERY; WOMEN; RISK; CONTINUITY; BIRTH;
D O I
10.1016/j.wombi.2015.08.011
中图分类号
R47 [护理学];
学科分类号
1011 ;
摘要
Background: In 1989, the first major state-wide report into maternity services, known as the Shearman Report after its author, was released in New South Wales, the most populous state in Australia. Aim: This paper reflects upon the report and tracks the progress of five of its key recommendations. The recommendations are still some of the major issues facing maternity services across the country. These are: community-based maternity care, rural maternity services, hospital visiting rights for privately practising midwives, obstetric intervention, and midwifery continuity of maternity care. Findings: In some ways, much has changed in 25 years including the terminology used in the report, the importance of midwifery continuity of care and the woman-centred nature of many services. However, in other ways, there is still a long way to go to address these major issues. Despite more than a quarter of a century, many recommendations have not been fulfilled, especially access to care in rural areas, rates of obstetric intervention, and the issue of visiting rights for privately practising midwives which has gone backwards. Conclusion: A continued and renewed effort is needed to ensure that the forward thinking recommendations of the Shearman Report are ultimately realised for all women and their families. Crown Copyright (C) 2015 Published by Elsevier Australia (a division of Reed International Books Australia Pty Ltd) on behalf of Australian College of Midwives. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:93 / 99
页数:7
相关论文
共 31 条
[1]  
Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2012, DEATHS CAT NUMB 3302
[2]  
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2012, HLTH WELF AUSTR AB T
[3]   Publicly funded homebirth in Australia: a review of maternal and neonatal outcomes over 6 years [J].
Catling-Paull, Christine ;
Coddington, Rebecca L. ;
Foureur, Maralyn J. ;
Homer, Caroline S. E. .
MEDICAL JOURNAL OF AUSTRALIA, 2013, 198 (11) :616-620
[4]  
Centre for Epidemiology and Evidence New South Wales, 2014, MOTH BAB 2012
[5]  
Centre for Epidemiology and Research, 2006, NEW S WAL MOTH BAB 2
[6]  
Commonwealth of Australia, 2010, NAT MAT SERV PLAN
[7]  
Commonwealth of Australia, 1983, MAT PER COMM REP O 2
[8]   Rates of obstetric intervention among low-risk women giving birth in private and public hospitals in NSW: a population-based descriptive study [J].
Dahlen, Hannah Grace ;
Tracy, Sally ;
Tracy, Mark ;
Bisits, Andrew ;
Brown, Chris ;
Thornton, Charlene .
BMJ OPEN, 2012, 2 (05)
[9]  
Flint C, 1989, Midwifery, V5, P11, DOI 10.1016/S0266-6138(89)80059-2
[10]   Experiences of Women Planning a Home Birth Who Require Intrapartum Transfer to Hospital: A Metasynthesis of the Qualitative Literature [J].
Fox, Deborah ;
Sheehan, Athena ;
Homer, Caroline .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CHILDBIRTH, 2014, 4 (02) :103-119