[Report 1939] / Medical Officer of Health, Leicester Borough.

  • Leicester (England). Borough Council.
Date:
1939
Catalogue details

Licence: Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)

Credit: [Report 1939] / Medical Officer of Health, Leicester Borough. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    82/144 (page 68)
    In Area No. 7 (Spinney Hill) there has been an increase in numbers, chiefly during the second half of the year since the retirement of an independent midwife with a considerable practice. The increase will probably be more marked in 1940. Area No. 8 (Stoneygate and Evington) shows a slight decrease in number of cases in 1939, and owing to the nature of this area it is doubtful whether there will be much change in the future, but in considering the amount of work done, the extent of the area served by this midwife must be kept in mind. Transport facilities do not aid the midwife to any appreciable extent and she therefore of necessity has to spend a considerable time travelling to and from her cases. In addition, she relieves a midwife in Area No. 4 (Central Area). COMMENTS. (1) The original scheme is being constantly surveyed in view cf altered conditions in any area, but, apari from the modifications previously mentioned, it has not been considered necessary or advisable to make any drastic changes in the original grouping of the work. (2) It would appear that it will not be possible for all midwives in one area to work up to the maximum of 80 cases, as, in practice, it has been proved that the actual number of cases attended or visits paid is not always a true indication of the amount of work put in by the in¬ dividual midwife. Such matters as the proportion of first babies, and therefore longer hours in labour, facilities available at the home, the distance to be travelled by the midwife, and the fact that the very nature of the work makes it impossible to group or to space it, these factors inevitably result in very busy and then comparatively slack periods of work. (3) In addition, Municipal Midwives attend the ante-natal clinic with their patients who have not booked a doctor. This is of obvious advantage to the midwife and the patient. (4) A sincere endeavour has been made to maintain off duty time agreed upon in the original scheme and, with a few exceptions due to emergency or illness, this has been possible. This fixed leisure, as well as being appreciated by the midwife is also an indirect benefit to the patient. As stated in a survey of the scheme after its first 12 months’ working, no dramatic results were claimed for the Midwives’ Act, 1936, but it may be well to reiterate the following benefits to the patients which have resulted from the operation of the Act.