A Reflection of My Caseholding
A reflection about my experience of caseloading
For this essay I will be using the John’s (2000) structured model of reflection, as I find it guides me through my thoughts in a clear and structured format. I will be reflecting on a caseloading experience mainly in relation to the labour and birth, as this was a key time in meeting many of the objectives of the module and as a result has been a great benefit to myself not only as a student midwife but for my future career. The particular woman in this case will be referred to as Claire in order to maintain confidentiality. She was a low risk multiparous woman (National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence 2008).
It was clear from the booking that Claire had not had a very positive experience with her first delivery and therefore I felt that she would be an ideal candidate to approach about caseloading, as the additional support and continuity could benefit her greatly (Rogers 2009; Van der Kooy 2009). Claire was very keen to be involved and I saw her at almost every scheduled appointment of care.
As the due date approached it became extremely clear to me that Claire’s fears surrounding the birth were increasing, which has been found to be a common theme (Maier 2010). I discussed these fears with her in an attempt to help alleviate them and make this birth a positive experience for her. Her main fears were having another instrumental delivery and an episiotomy as the last healed poorly. Claire was aware herself that there was a higher chance of an episiotomy with an instrumental delivery (Raisanen, Vehvilainen-Julkunen and Heinonen 2008) and I reassured her as much as I could in relation to current research but knew myself that the outcome of this birth could not be predicted. Research has found this to be a common fear for women with a previous instrumental delivery (Goyder, Bahi, Ford and Strachan 2010). As an autonomous midwife I will face many challenges and responsibilities in my role and this
For this essay I will be using the John’s (2000) structured model of reflection, as I find it guides me through my thoughts in a clear and structured format. I will be reflecting on a caseloading experience mainly in relation to the labour and birth, as this was a key time in meeting many of the objectives of the module and as a result has been a great benefit to myself not only as a student midwife but for my future career. The particular woman in this case will be referred to as Claire in order to maintain confidentiality. She was a low risk multiparous woman (National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence 2008).
It was clear from the booking that Claire had not had a very positive experience with her first delivery and therefore I felt that she would be an ideal candidate to approach about caseloading, as the additional support and continuity could benefit her greatly (Rogers 2009; Van der Kooy 2009). Claire was very keen to be involved and I saw her at almost every scheduled appointment of care.
As the due date approached it became extremely clear to me that Claire’s fears surrounding the birth were increasing, which has been found to be a common theme (Maier 2010). I discussed these fears with her in an attempt to help alleviate them and make this birth a positive experience for her. Her main fears were having another instrumental delivery and an episiotomy as the last healed poorly. Claire was aware herself that there was a higher chance of an episiotomy with an instrumental delivery (Raisanen, Vehvilainen-Julkunen and Heinonen 2008) and I reassured her as much as I could in relation to current research but knew myself that the outcome of this birth could not be predicted. Research has found this to be a common fear for women with a previous instrumental delivery (Goyder, Bahi, Ford and Strachan 2010). As an autonomous midwife I will face many challenges and responsibilities in my role and this
References: Bacon, L. 2010. Involving supervisors of midwives in student education. British Journal of Midwifery 18 (5): 308-314. Baskett, T. 2004. Essential Management of Obstetric Emergencies. 4th ed. Bristol: Clinical Press Ltd. Bick, D. 2010. Communication Communication Communication. Midwifery 26: 377-378. Cluett, E.R. 2005. Using the Evidence to Inform Decisions. In: Decision Making in Midwifery Practice, edited by Raynor, M.D., J.E. Marshall. and A. Sullivan. Edinburgh: Elsevier. Davies, S. and J. Mason. 2009. Perceptorship for newly qualified midwives: time for a change. British Journal of Midwifery 17 (12): 804-806. Donovan, P.R. 2008. A career in midwifery. In: An Essential Guide for Student Midwives Preparing for Professional Practice, edited by Jacob, S. and T. Lavender. London: MA Healthcare Ltd. Goyder, K., R. Bahi., J. Ford. and B. Strachan. 2010. Do midwives give adequate information to women about instrumental birth. British Journal of Midwifery 18 (4): 237-241. Griffith, R Johns, C. 2000 Becoming a reflective practitioner: a reflective and holistic approach to clinical nursing, practice development and clinical supervision. Oxford: Blackwell Science Lyne, M., M Maier, B. 2010. Women’s worries about childbirth making safe choices. British Journal of Midwifery 18 (5): 293-299. Marshall, J.E. 2005. Autonomy and the Midwife. In: Decision Making in Midwifery Practice, edited by Raynor, M.D., J.E. Marshall. and A. Sullivan. Edinburgh: Elsevier. Midirs. 2008. Informed Choice for professionals: The informed choice initiative. Bristol: Midirs. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. 2008. Antenatal Care: Quick reference guide 62. London: NICE. Nolan, M. 2002. The consumer view. In: Clinical Risk Management in Midwifery, edited by Symon, A. and J.H. Wilson. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann. Nursing & Midwifery Council. 2004. Midwives rules and standards. London: Nursing & Midwifery Council. Nursing & Midwifery Council. 2008a. The Code: Standards of conduct, performance and ethics for nurses and midwives. London: Nursing & Midwifery Council. Nursing & Midwifery Council. 2008b. Modern supervision in action a practical guide for midwives. London: Nursing & Midwifery Council. O’Boyle, D. 2006. Why informed consent is important in the exercise of maternal choice. In: Risk and Choice in Maternity Care, edited by Symon, A. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone. Raisanen, S., K. Vehvilainen-Julkunen, and S. Heinonen. 2008. Need for and consequences of episiotomy in vaginal birth: a critical approach. Midwifery 26: 348-356 Rogers Steele, R. 2008. Gaining confidence and competence as a midwife. In: An Essential Guide for Student Midwives Preparing for Professional Practice, edited by Jacob, S. and T. Lavender. London: MA Healthcare Ltd. Stephens, L. 2010. Improving the service: working together to promote normal birth. British Journal of Midwifery 18 (6): 348. Stewart, S. 2002. The roles of the midwifery manager and supervision of midwives. In: Clinical Risk Management in Midwifery, edited by Symon, A. and J.H. Wilson. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann. Sullivan, A. 2005. The bloody supply of midwifery practice. In: Decision Making in Midwifery Practice, edited by Raynor, M.D., J.E. Marshall. and A. Sullivan. Edinburgh: Elsevier Churchill Livingstone. Van der Kooy, B. 2009. Choice for women and choice for midwives – making it happen. British Journal of Midwifery 17 (9): 524-526.