Denise and her blog

What Is Happening In Midwifery?

Midwifery appears to be at a crossroads, both in the UK and elsewhere. Practice and education are both under attack, largely from paternalistic factions wanting to control childbirth and the profession of midwifery. Childbirth has become the pariah of healthcare, causing immense stress for expectant and birthing parents, leading midwives to leave the NHS and even the profession, and the government to have knee-jerk reactions in terms of national reviews and even the suggestion of a minister for maternity care.  

As a midwife of almost 50 years, I have seen maternity care and midwifery practice change from something akin to the “Call the Midwife” era (I started in the mid-1970s), to the deplorable state we find ourselves in today. We have had numerous reviews over those years, from the 1970 Peel Report advocating hospital birth, to the three Maternity Care in Action reports in the 80s, Changing Childbirth in the 90s, to a string or reports, investigations and attempts to improve maternity care in the 2000s. But what ARE the current problems and how can some of the issues be resolved – or, indeed, can they?

First, in my opinion, is a catastrophic and almost total loss of any understanding – amongst midwives, obstetricians and the public - that pregnancy and birth are physiological life events that simply require careful observation and, in a few cases, when progress deviates from the anticipated norm, medical support. There is also a significant lack of understanding by the government, NHS, obstetricians and even some midwives, of the wide role of the midwife, as defined by the World Health Organisation, which focuses on working with women from the preconception period, through pregnancy, birth and the postnatal period up to one year following birth of the baby.   

The denial of “normality” has led to increased medicalisation of birth with premature and unwarranted “cascades of intervention” and excessively high induction (up to 60% in at least one unit known to me) and Caesarean rates that have overtaken spontaneous vaginal births. This is coupled with a deplorably coercive and paternalistic approach to maternity care “options” for expectant and birthing parents, largely driven by a fear of litigation if no action is taken, and the obstetric culture of wanting to “do something”, with controlled management, as in other medical specialties. Expectant parents are “advised” that intervention is necessary to protect them and their babies, with insufficient information given to aid them in making informed decisions about their births. Some parents are so anxious about their maternity experiences at the hands of the NHS, that they choose home birth, independent midwives or even unassisted birth.

Added to the internal issues around medicalisation are the demands from the anti-natural childbirth lobby, which have arisen from various investigations into baby loss. It is, of course, very sad when any baby, or mother, dies in childbirth, but we should be careful to put this in perspective. Whilst perinatal loss and maternal mortality statistics could be a great deal better, the majority of women have – or at least could have, if left to physiology – a perfectly normal pregnancy and a spontaneous vaginal birth. It is often the intervention that adds to the “abnormality” which then leads to further medicalisation. Any national review is only likely to add to the intervention in a “just in case” approach.

On the other hand, we now have many more women with increasingly complex pathological, psychological and social needs, who require obstetric and often general medical treatment, leading to increased staffing requirements, clinical costs and bed occupancy. Whilst the birth rate has fallen slightly, there are additional demands on the maternity services, with medical advances enabling women who would otherwise not have been able to conceive and reproduce, as well as people newly arrived in the UK who may present with issues that have not hitherto been familiar to NHS staff.

We now have a shortage of midwifery staff, with many experienced midwives near retirement age and many more leaving the NHS due to burnout. This is well documented by a press hungry to highlight the problems of the maternity services, leading to a poor perception of midwifery that can affect recruitment, It is not that midwives want to stop caring for expectant and birthing parents, but that they can no longer tolerate long hours and unpaid overtime, lack of gratitude and incessant demands on their energy that leave many unable even to find time to go to the toilet or have a drink, let alone take the statutorily required breaks in their working days.

Midwifery education must also take some of the blame for the current issues in the maternity services. There is a “bums on seats” approach by universities accepting students, coupled with lecturing staff redundancies, leading to lack of support for student midwives who are then unable to cope with the rigours of midwifery theoretical learning and clinical practice. Students are required to pay exorbitant fees for education that may still not provide them with jobs and preceptorships at the end of their pre-registration period. I am sceptical about preceptorships which, in the NHS are a management strategy to ensure that all midwives are capable of working in all clinical areas to fill staffing gaps. However, for newly qualified midwives (NQMs), it is certainly advisable to consolidate their learning, yet there appear to be fewer and fewer opportunities to do so immediately after qualifying. The gap between obtaining registration and actually starting clinical work often leads to loss of momentum, with some NQMs never practising. 

All these factors discussed so far have resulted in a deplorable lack of experience of physiological birth for student and NQMs who are then fearful of caring for parents wanting a more natural birth because they do not understand it in practical terms. This only perpetuates and strengthens the argument for intervention. Further, there is little career development support to enable midwives to specialise in a specific area of midwifery, coupled with a “dumbing down” of expertise by employing more support workers. 

There is also, in both education and practice, a culture implying that students are being trained for the NHS, with an overall political refusal to accept midwifery as a profession which enables midwives to work in any setting, anywhere, both NHS and privately, at home and overseas, subject to local requirements. Further, there remains difficulty in obtaining professional indemnity insurance cover for those who wish to work in a self-employed capacity, although some steps have been taken in more recent years to address this.

Further, there is a totally unacceptable culture of bullying within NHS maternity services, both midwifery and medical, from management and between clinical colleagues, with an element of multi-professional tensions adding to the problem.  The overall attitude within the maternity services is punitive and threatening, with staff afraid to speak out – it is easier to fit with the system than to be seen as a maverick. All of this leads to high sickness and absence rates, resignations and significant mental health issues for individuals concerned. 

And so, we get to finance, which the government seems to think is one of the primary issues. Perhaps there is a shortage of funding for maternity services, but more likely it is the inappropriate allocation of resources and the need to fund interventionist practice which impacts on maternity, anaesthetic and paediatric services, as well as bed capacity and other services eg domestic and portering. Yes, we could do with more money in the NHS generally, but it is not the sole answer.

Throwing money at the issue of the maternity services is not going to solve the problems. Neither will yet another government sponsored review, which already adds political bias, be the answer, nor the appointment of a Minister for Maternity Services.    

Evidence-Informed Education In Complementary Therapies

Every day, midwives hold an extraordinary position of trust.

Women come to you not only for clinical expertise, but for reassurance, interpretation, and guidance - especially when they’re exploring complementary or natural approaches alongside conventional care.

That’s why I believe so strongly that midwives deserve robust, evidence-informed education in complementary therapies.

Not to replace clinical practice - but to enhance it.

To help you answer questions with confidence.
To support women safely, ethically and within your scope.

At Expectancy, everything we teach is grounded in midwifery values: safety, professionalism, critical thinking and woman-centred care.

Happy New Year !!

The start of a new year often brings a moment to pause and reflect on where we are - and where we’d like to grow.

For many midwives, that growth comes from deepening knowledge, building confidence, and finding new ways to support women with care that is both evidence-informed and compassionate.  

Complementary therapies can play a valuable role in that journey when they’re integrated safely and professionally.

If you’re considering developing your skills this year - whether for your clinical role or for a future private practice - I’d love to support you in exploring what’s possible.  

A new year can be the beginning of a very rewarding next chapter.

Reflections

I’ve been reflecting on our first practical weekend of the Acupuncture course back in October, taught by our lovely Amanda.  

It’s always such a memorable point in the programme - that moment when midwives begin actually placing needles for the first time!

There’s usually a mix of excitement and a little apprehension, which is completely natural. But the group handled it brilliantly, supporting one another as they developed their confidence and technique.

Acupuncture is a wonderfully effective tool in maternity care, and watching midwives lean into new skills with such enthusiasm is one of the joys of teaching. 💜

The Parlous State Of The UK Maternity Services – Is Midwifery Education To Blame?

Sunday 9^th November 2025 was a sad day for midwifery education in the UK with the publication in the Sunday Times of an article blaming universities offering pre-registration training of promoting an irresponsible  “normal birth ideology”, apparently at the expense of safety for mothers and babies. Only a couple of weeks ago, the media bombarded us with the risks of home birth, following a case in which both mother and baby died. And now, the likes of Wes Streeting, Jeremy Hunt and of course James Titcombe, have waded in to the debate, taking the angle that midwives’ training programmes are to blame. This week, using the emotive case of a mother whose baby died at 42 weeks’ gestation, allegedly because she was not advised to have an induction for postdates pregnancy, the anti-natural-childbirth lobby has yet again found an excuse to launch another attack on midwifery, maternity care – and now – on midwifery education.

It is obvious that those determined to disparage midwifery and everything it stands for have no knowledge of childbirth as a normal bio-psycho-social life event nor of the dangers of the astronomical rates of intervention we are currently facing, across many westernised countries including not only the UK, but Australia, the USA and many European countries. There is no understanding of the World Health Organisation’s and International Confederation of Midwives’ definitions of midwifery and what constitutes midwifery practice, nor of their commitment to midwives as specialists in physiological birth. There is no comprehension of the role of the regulator (Nursing and Midwifery Council) in maintaining the international essential competencies for midwifery as promoters of physiological birth. And there is no empathy in failing to acknowledge parental emotions, desires or needs in this natural process of having a baby. Midwifery educator peers have been vilified (again) for daring to organise the annual Normal Birth conference, with the media – and those influencing the media – casting aspersions that this perpetuates the “ideology of normal birth at all costs”. Universities offering midwifery programmes have now come under fire for allowing this apparent dogma to thrive, with critics claiming that students are not being taught safe practice.

These critics – the policy makers, the politicians and influencers previously affected personally by birth related mortality or morbidity – have catastrophically failed to appreciate the multifactorial issues facing the maternity services,  the midwifery and obstetric professions, midwifery education and all the other issues impacting on the dire situation we now face. We have a paternalistic antenatal and birth system that sees birth as a medical issue to be managed – and managed within the constraints of finances, staffing and bed space. We have an ever-increasing population with more women with complex pregnancies, often requiring intervention to achieve a safe birth.  We have a maternity care system rife with bullying – of staff and consumers. We have a profession that is scared to step outside guidelines to support women safely and appropriately. We have such a focus on evidence-based practice that we are at risk of losing all common sense when it comes to birth.  

There is an ageing midwifery workforce with many senior and experienced midwives retiring, sometimes taking early retirement to escape the deplorable maternity service environment. Conversely, we have students entering midwifery education with fewer prospects of jobs at the end because of an under-funded and inappropriately pathologised system. Crucially, students are not witnessing physiological birth in practice, nor are they observing experienced midwives prepared to advocate for normal birth out of fear of being accused of whistle blowing in an increasingly punitive system. Indeed, in defence of obstetricians, medical staff are also not seeing enough physiological labour and birth to be certain of their own boundaries, leading them to take a “just in case” approach, often intervening before it becomes necessary. Lack of experience, as a student or newly qualified midwife, of birth as a normal life event means that midwives  are encultured into the medicalisation of birth, with many never developing the confidence to care for women in physiological labour nor the competence to recognise when labour deviates from normal progress and requires referral to obstetricians who specialise in “abnormal” labour.

Universities could be accused of being partly to blame for inappropriate education of midwives, but not in respect of evangelically promoting a normal birth “ideology”. Universities are businesses and need “bums on seats” to make their programmes cost effective. Shared learning has become standard in many higher education institutions – and not primarily because some shared learning is valuable, but because it saves money, time and rooming needs. My personal bugbear is the lack of anatomy and physiology that is now taught in midwifery pre-registration programmes (and sometimes not at all) – yet a deeper applied knowledge of A&P can save lives, both babies’ and mothers’. Midwifery educators are bound to comply with the international standards for midwifery, the UK standards for pre-registration education and to instil in students and qualified midwives the confidence in achieving and upholding the principles of midwifery practice, knowledge, understanding and progress.

Indeed, this whole debacle -accusing midwives and educators of promoting an “ideology of birth as normal at all costs” - smacks of yet another way in which the profession and expectant and birthing parents can be influenced. We have increasing numbers of parents petrified – not of giving birth, but of the maternity services in which they give birth. We have midwives who are terrorised by the ever-present threat of litigation. We have midwifery managers who have the constant sword of Damocles in respect of saving money whilst avoiding litigation hanging over them. We have a disjointed maternity service that is so embedded in the contemporary culture of fear, that no one is able to tie everything together for the good of all concerned.

It is time for midwives to fight – for our profession, our education system and most of all, for the women and babies in our care. We need to address the huge problems of an NHS that is no longer fit for purpose, especially in maternity care. We need to challenge the educational programmes for student midwives to ensure they can develop the confidence and competence to practise safely whilst addressing the full bio-psycho-social needs of people in their care. We need to challenge government to analyse the myriad issues faced by the maternity services – not in yet more service reviews, nor in simply throwing money at the system, but by changing the mindset of everyone to accept that childbirth – in the main – IS a normal life event. We need a better balance between spontaneous onset and progress of birth versus inappropriate or sometimes necessary intervention. And we need educational systems that ensure that both midwives and obstetricians can work together to provide the full spectrum of care that is effective, safe, cost effective, evidence-based where necessary and fit for purpose.

The media creates fear because fear keeps the population under control. And – make no mistake – this fear is male-driven. By this, I don’t mean only those biological men who are currently active in the debate, but our whole patriarchal society that puts women in a subservient position, something that has always been the case in relation to childbirth. And there, perhaps, lies the crux of the problem. We are not going to win the battle and be able to advocate for the midwifery profession and for childbearing women until we address the culture of childbirth more generally. The profession of midwifery is largely a female-dominated one, whereas traditionally obstetrics has been male-dominated. Even though that has changed, with far greater numbers of female obstetricians, they too have trained and practised in an autocratic medical system that persists to this day.

All that this current media scrutiny will achieve is to accelerate the climate of fear around childbirth, giving parents fewer choices and, in some cases, driving parents away from professional help, which may in itself lead to a whole raft of other problems.  Whatever the media states, pregnancy and birth ARE normal physiological life events and midwifery is the profession best placed to help in that process.

What Should You Learn on a Midwifery Aromatherapy Course? 

Expectancy has been running aromatherapy courses for Midwives for 21 years. I have been teaching aromatherapy for over 40 years, including as part of a BA Honours degree at the University of Greenwich.  My Masters degree focused on the safety of aromatherapy in pregnancy and birth. 

You might find another course, cheaper, better publicised and looking like it's more fun but is it really what you need rather than what you want? Compassionate care is about safe care, so aromatherapy always need to be safe before it's effective. 

The issue for midwives is not about the lovely aromas and a bit of massage. It's about using some aspects of aromatherapy as a specific clinical tool to enhance midwifery care. Furthermore, it's about fitting aromatherapy into the parameters of midwifery practice outlined in the NMC Code, especially since aromatherapy is not a standard part of midwifery practice. It's an additional tool that can be a fabulous complement to midwifery care but it needs to fit in the context of your midwifery registration. 

So, what should an aromatherapy course for midwives cover?

• What is aromatherapy?
• Chemistry of essential oils
• Benefits AND risks of essential oils in pregnancy and birth
• Indications, contradictions and precautions to aromatherapy in pregnancy and birth
• Pharmacology and pharmacokinetics
• Legal aspects of using oils in midwifery and in maternity units and birth centres 
• Professional issues for midwives providing aromatherapy, in the maternity unit, birth centre of home setting
• Health and safety aspects of using oils in the workplace 
• Dealing with complications - and how to minimise the risks
• Professional autonomy when using essential oils 
• Protecting yourself as well as others 
• The practice of aromatherapy - scientific modes of blending, methods of administration - note that this comes after the professional, scientific and safety aspects  have been covered

In Support of Home Birth

I am desperately sorry for the family of the mother and baby who died following a home birth recently. I am also sympathetic towards the midwife and other staff involved in this situation who did their best in difficult circumstances. Whilst it is not my place to comment on the precise details of this case, it seems that the family decided to birth “outside of (NHS) guidance” and allegedly, repeatedly declined to accept advice for transfer to hospital for medical care. 

However, the media has taken it upon itself to castigate the family for its decisions, an unkind reaction for a devastated family, and has concluded that it was the family’s choice of home birth that was “wrong”, sparking yet another furious debate about the risks home birth. In particular, the family’s previous experiences of the maternity services seem to have influenced their choices for the birth of their second child at home.

Having a baby is a normal life event. Women’s bodies are designed to be pregnant and give birth. I had my son, Adam, at home, at the age of 34 - a 24-hour labour and a forceps birth; he weighed 4.3kg. However, the obstetrician and the two midwives who cared for me were friends. They knew me well enough to know that if things started to deviate from physiological progress, I would accept their decisions. And I knew them well enough to know that if they advised transfer to hospital, it was the right decision. We trusted each other and we worked in partnership with one another.

I trained as a midwife in the middle 1970s, only a few years after the Peel report advocated hospital birth for all women, yet we were still emotionally committed to birth at home. As students we learned to recognise when labour progress was deviating from normal and we knew what to do about it. We used techniques which have now been given fancy names (such as “hypnobirthing” and “biomechanics”) – these were a standard part of midwifery practice. We grew to know the families and saw them frequently for both antenatal care and “parentcraft” classes, which served as both an educational opportunity and a social meeting place. As a community midwife, we usually attended births on our own, without mobile ‘phones for added communication with colleagues or satnavs to find our way in the middle of the night.

Home birth is safe – and often safer than having a baby in today’s NHS with its “institutional ticking clock” and the belief that things should progress at a pre-defined pace based on nothing more than management needs for bed space and saving money. This family – and many others - are victims of a disempowering system which made them afraid to have their baby in a maternity unit and who decided that their home, surrounded by their family, was the natural place to give birth. 

Nowhere, in what I have read about this case, has there been any real media acknowledgement of the underlying issues within the NHS which may have contributed to the family’s choices. Issues include coercive (bullying) behaviour from doctors and midwives for a woman to adhere to a particular course of action, staff shortages leading to harassed care providers, the paternalistic and litigation conscious approach to childbirth, the lack of experience of “normal” (physiological) birth amongst more recently qualified midwives and doctors and a blurring of the lines between what is normal and what is not.  

It is time for parents, professionals and the maternity services to reclaim childbirth as a normal human bio-psycho-social event. The public needs to regain its trust in the maternity services and those who care for expectant and birthing women. 

The Power of Essential Oils

When I first started working with essential oils in practice, I knew they could be powerful - but I didn’t realise just how powerful.

A single essential oil can contain over 300 naturally occurring chemicals, each one with its own therapeutic properties.

Some are calming.
Some reduce blood pressure.
Some can actually stimulate contractions.

In midwifery, that’s not just interesting - it’s essential knowledge.

Because when used with confidence and the right training, aromatherapy can genuinely support women through:

🌿 Early labour
🌿 Pain relief
🌿 Nausea
🌿 Anxiety
…and more.

But it’s not something to dabble in lightly. The wrong oil, at the wrong time, can do harm.

That’s why we teach it clinically - so midwives can use aromatherapy safely, professionally, and with real skill.

Worldwide Midwifery Friendships

One of the best parts of my recent trip to Hong Kong? The people.  

It was such a joy to reconnect with colleagues like Elce, Head of the School of Midwifery, and Jessie from the Chinese University of Hong Kong and to share a lunch of wonderful dim sum and laughter, and really inspiring conversation with a wider group of midwives and educators.

There’s something special about sitting around a table with midwives from across the world - different systems, different pressures, but the same passion for physiology, compassion, and safe, woman-centred care.

More soon about the teaching side of the trip, but for now, I’m simply feeling thankful for midwifery friendships that stretch across continents.