UNHAPPY EVENT
Sui,—Every time one small voice rises to cry out against some of the appalling treatment meted out
to mothers under the National Health Service, it is immediately shouted down. Having read the letters published on November 27 in answer to Jacky Gillott's sad tale, I feel I must come in on her side.
We all know there are hospitals where maternity care is good, the staff kind, the food adequate in all respects, and a civilised atmosphere prevails. One is Charing Cross, where I have myself received excellent ante-natal care—and no queues at all I However, while these hospitals are publicised' widely, their guiding lights writing helpful books on childbirth and gracing many BBC programmes, there are, alas, so many others where 'care' is a very euphemistic term for the service rendered.
I have had two babies (the first of which was still-born) in one of the latter.
The ante-natal department was housed in an outdated annexe of flimsy construction. It had one lavatory and no wash basin. For examinations around fifty women (many of whom had appoint- ments for 1.30 p.m.) were lined up by 3 p.m. when, theoretically, the consultant arrived. The last seldom left. before 4.45 p.m. Women requiring a blood test had to wait standing in an open yard, often for thirty minutes.
• The wards and nursery were crowded. In one ward there was one bath and one lavatory for, I think, fourteen women. The labour ward had accom- modation for three mothers at one time. There were no rooms, private or otherwise, for women in dif- ferent stages of labour, and no provision was made in the way of drinks or refreshments for those in labour. During my total of six days in the hospital no fruit or green vegetables were served to me.
During my second labour I was left entirely alone, but fo'r one examination on arrival. I was not offered a bath, and none of the preparations were made until very late in the first stage, after which I was left again until my groans indicated birth was imminent.
The only drugs I received were three small tablets that looked and tasted like codeine. My requests for gas and air were ignored and when I asked the supervising doctor, 'Does no one here have any sympathy?' he said, 'If we wasted our time sym- pathising, you mothers would never get on with it. Stop wasting energy and messing about.'
Of course, the child was born in spite of the Mental and physical cruelty I received, and within thirty-six hours I had left the hospital for a far more congenial nursing home.
I know that individuals have vastly differing stan- dards and pain thresholds, but I was there long enough to realise that every mother there felt as I did: that all but two of the midwives were un- necessarily unkind; that our babies were neglected; that necessities such as sanitary towels were never available when we required them; that mistakes were liable to be made over drugs; and that we were left lying on bloodstained sheets throughout our stay. I am well aware that this unit was particularly understaffed and overworked. It had not even suf- ficient means to provide napkins for a full quota of babies; but this is the sort of hospital in which far too many women are required to give birth.
There is muoh heartbreak in store for those who believe the tales of a joyful and fulfilling birth, and then are sent to such a place.
LINDEN HOPKIN
Bachelors Cottage, High Halden, Nr. Ashford, Kent
Previous page
