Midwifery Group Practice: Is Continuity of Care the Future of Australian Maternity Services?

Geelong mother Rachel Harkin’s positive experience highlights a growing trend: pregnant women are actively seeking continuity of care. Her story reflects a desire for a consistent and supportive experience during pregnancy, birth, and postpartum. Midwifery Group Practice (MGP) programs, where women are cared for by the same midwife throughout their journey, seem to provide just that.

MGP’s coordinator, Serena Pellizzeri, emphasizes the far-reaching advantages – improved birth outcomes, better patient experiences, and enhanced midwife retention. Plus, she points out, it’s cost-effective. That claim alone warrants closer examination, though. Can MGP truly deliver on all fronts?
>

Demand definitely exceeds supply. This isn’t exactly news. Anecdotally, securing a spot in an MGP program is akin to winning a small lottery, particularly in public hospitals. A recent ABC investigation found that only a fraction of Victorian hospitals offer MGP or similar models, catering to a small percentage of births. What about the women who miss out?

The limitations of public MGP programs are pushing some towards private midwives. One regional Victorian midwife voiced concerns about equitable access to maternity care, especially in rural areas. She raises a critical point: should comprehensive antenatal care be a privilege, or a right? It feels wrong that financial constraints might dictate how often a woman receives essential check-ups. I’ve seen firsthand the stress this adds to already vulnerable families.

This access issue is further compounded by a shortage of local GPs and obstetricians offering maternity care in some regions. It creates a perfect storm, potentially jeopardizing maternal and infant health.
>

The push for private midwives to gain hospital admitting rights is gaining momentum. It is a logical step towards bridging care gaps, though I suspect resistance from established medical hierarchies will be fierce. Tiarne Sainty’s experience speaks volumes. She valued the personalized care from her private midwife, even though that midwife couldn’t be present during labor. It underscores the significance of that consistent relationship.

To that end, the Victorian government established a taskforce to explore best-practice models, especially in regional and rural areas. The taskforce’s recent report suggests that prioritizing choice and individual needs is important.

The Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation Victorian branch believes MGP is the “gold standard” and champions greater accessibility. They contend that resources should be strategically channeled into MGP programs, rather than assuming that increased funding is necessarily required, because they can be relatively inexpensive to develop. This assertion prompts scrutiny. Is it truly a matter of reallocation, or is more investment needed to scale these programs effectively?

The Victorian government’s response indicates an intention to strengthen MGP programs, citing a substantial investment in the nursing and midwifery workforce. These promises are encouraging, yet past experiences temper enthusiasm. Intentions are good, but their effect may be limited.

Key Considerations for the Future of Maternity Care in Australia:

Demand vs. Capacity: How can health systems effectively meet the escalating demand for continuity of care models like MGP, especially within resource constraints? This challenge demands innovative solutions. Equity of Access: Addressing the disparity in access between metropolitan and regional areas, and between those who can afford private care and those who rely on public services, must be a priority. Integration of Private Midwives: Integrating private midwives into the broader healthcare system, potentially through hospital admitting rights, requires careful negotiation and collaboration with existing medical professionals. A collaborative approach is paramount. Cost-Effectiveness: While MGP is touted as cost-effective, thorough analysis is needed to confirm this claim at scale and to identify optimal funding models. It’s worth noting that “cost-effective” doesn’t always equate to “best outcome” if quality is compromised. Workforce Sustainability: Addressing burnout and improving retention among midwives is critical for the long-term viability of MGP programs. This requires competitive pay, supportive work environments, and opportunities for professional development. Personalized Care: Tailoring maternity care to individual needs and preferences is essential. This requires a shift away from standardized protocols and towards more flexible and responsive models of care.

The conversation around midwifery group practices highlights a fundamental shift in expectations. Women are increasingly seeking a more personalized and continuous approach to maternity care. These models can have benefits for healthcare professionals as well. Whether public health systems can adapt quickly enough to meet this need remains to be seen. The stakes, however, are undeniably high: the health and well-being of mothers and their babies. The time to act is now.

Read Original

Keywords: Midwifery group practice, continuity of care, maternity services Australia, Geelong mothers, private midwives, birth outcomes, midwife retention, maternity care access