When midwife continuity of carer is the policy proposal, what is the problem of perinatal health inequalities represented to be?

SN social sciences Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2025-05-09 DOI:10.1007/s43545-025-01085-x
Ditte Madsen
{"title":"When midwife continuity of carer is the policy proposal, what is the problem of perinatal health inequalities represented to be?","authors":"Ditte Madsen","doi":"10.1007/s43545-025-01085-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Midwife continuity of carer (MCOC) is widely recommended to protect birthing people against disrespectful care and mitigate effects of social adversity. In the UK, this is reflected in the Core20PLUS5 framework, which identifies maternity and, specifically, MCOC as one of five national priorities for reducing healthcare inequalities. Within health policy networks, the prevailing view of the policy process is that the task of government is to find solutions to existing policy problems. A critical policy approach, in contrast, considers how any policy proposal represents a problem in a particular way, shaping what is perceived as possible or desirable. Adopting this approach, I suggest that the promise of MCOC (and, specifically, intrapartum continuity) has been overstated, given the context of extreme social inequality, chronic underfunding of the NHS, the impact of austerity and the denial of structural racism in the UK. MCOC has been found to improve access, experience, and outcomes for disadvantaged and racially minoritized people by offering more personalized care. When MCOC is the policy proposal, however, the problem of inequalities in perinatal health tends to be represented in terms of fragmented maternity care, limiting policy discussion of the drivers of health inequality. This enables elected officials to appear to address health inequality by relying on midwives to adopt more flexible working practices. Representing the problem as a matter of health justice, in contrast, not only requires that personalized care is informed by structural competency and cultural safety but demands that policymakers address structural drivers beyond the healthcare system.</p>","PeriodicalId":74819,"journal":{"name":"SN social sciences","volume":"5 5","pages":"67"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12064444/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SN social sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43545-025-01085-x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Midwife continuity of carer (MCOC) is widely recommended to protect birthing people against disrespectful care and mitigate effects of social adversity. In the UK, this is reflected in the Core20PLUS5 framework, which identifies maternity and, specifically, MCOC as one of five national priorities for reducing healthcare inequalities. Within health policy networks, the prevailing view of the policy process is that the task of government is to find solutions to existing policy problems. A critical policy approach, in contrast, considers how any policy proposal represents a problem in a particular way, shaping what is perceived as possible or desirable. Adopting this approach, I suggest that the promise of MCOC (and, specifically, intrapartum continuity) has been overstated, given the context of extreme social inequality, chronic underfunding of the NHS, the impact of austerity and the denial of structural racism in the UK. MCOC has been found to improve access, experience, and outcomes for disadvantaged and racially minoritized people by offering more personalized care. When MCOC is the policy proposal, however, the problem of inequalities in perinatal health tends to be represented in terms of fragmented maternity care, limiting policy discussion of the drivers of health inequality. This enables elected officials to appear to address health inequality by relying on midwives to adopt more flexible working practices. Representing the problem as a matter of health justice, in contrast, not only requires that personalized care is informed by structural competency and cultural safety but demands that policymakers address structural drivers beyond the healthcare system.

当助产士的护理连续性是政策建议时,围产期保健不平等的问题是什么?
助产士护理连续性(MCOC)被广泛推荐用于保护产妇免受不尊重的护理和减轻社会逆境的影响。在联合王国,这反映在Core20PLUS5框架中,该框架将产妇,特别是产妇生育确定为减少保健不平等的五个国家优先事项之一。在保健政策网络内,对政策进程的普遍看法是,政府的任务是找到解决现有政策问题的办法。相比之下,批判性政策方法考虑任何政策建议如何以特定方式代表问题,塑造被认为是可能的或可取的。采用这种方法,我认为,鉴于极端的社会不平等、NHS长期资金不足、财政紧缩的影响以及英国对结构性种族主义的否认,MCOC(特别是分娩时的连续性)的承诺被夸大了。MCOC已被发现通过提供更个性化的护理来改善弱势群体和少数族裔的机会、经验和结果。然而,当MCOC作为政策建议时,围产期保健不平等问题往往表现为分散的产妇保健,限制了对保健不平等驱动因素的政策讨论。这使得民选官员似乎依靠助产士采取更灵活的工作做法来解决卫生不平等问题。相比之下,将这一问题代表为健康正义问题,不仅要求个性化护理以结构能力和文化安全为依据,而且要求政策制定者解决医疗保健系统之外的结构性驱动因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信