If you read what I wrote, I was refering to Americas CPM's simply because Thepees asked me for more information. I completley agree that USA's DEM's and Australias DEM's should not be compared, due to a completely different syllabus of education (USA's DEM's learn to worship the 'birth goddess', light candles, are taught the Salem witch hunt was about men suppressing women so they could take over birth, and the main DEM college over there even teach incorrect CPR and that monitoring the mothers heartbeat is the same as monitoring the babies- meaning the midwives are taught to monitor mothers heartbeat and mark it down as the babies). So yes, it is very different. However that hasn't stopped the hospitals from looking at statistics between their DEM's (CPM's) and their CNM (nurse-midwives) and feeling that the same results will be reflected here. Yes, that is unfair, but it's happening Don't hate the person that tells you this. It's not my fault they do this
That being said, the govt ARE trying to change hospital views. Such as this extract for rural area health providers:
"The relatively recent introduction of Direct Entry Midwifery (DEM)courses in Australia offers health services the opportunity the
move away from staffing structures that use nurses with midwifery
qualifications for both general nursing and midwifery duties. This
generalist approach restricts the opportunities for midwives to
work in their chosen field, often to the point where they leave
It is true that DEM graduates cannot be rostered for general
duties for which they are not trained, but hospital authorities that
do not develop ways to utilise Direct Entry Midwives will soon
find the pool from which their midwifery workforce can be drawn has all but dried up"
I wasn't able to find the article I was talking about previously, as it was Aussie so I dismissed it as unimportant for the factsheet over in USA, but I have a OBGYN trying to find a way to get me a study from the aussie Journal of Clinical Nursing so that I can pass it onto you ladies to relieve any doubts you have- to link, you would have to pay to read it after subscribing to the journal.
And NZ ladies, you aren't off the hook either lol. A close friend of mine is in charge of an organisation she created- Action to Improve Maternity. They work with families who have had negelgent midwives in NZ that caused a disabillity or death. As there are more and more happening, they want to create databases and update your training. Because of this organisation, the founder was a finalist for NZ's 2011 woman of the year, and has regular meetings with the health minister over there who has jumped on their cause, about ways to improve midwifery and how to go about implementing the database they want. In the 1960's, NZ was in the 10 ten for lowest perinatal deaths. Now, it's in the bottom 10- there is a reason for NZ being one of the worst 10 places to have a baby.