Warning of possible maternity review 'stoush'

The Southern District Health Board risked getting into a "stoush" if a rural maternity review was not handled correctly, warned two board members at yesterday's disability support and community and public health advisory committee meeting in Dunedin.

Several members voiced concerns over the terms of reference, appropriate representation on the advisory group and Venture Southland's separate review of Southland services.

Members Helen Algar and Kaye Crowther both said the board risked getting into a "stoush" if the review was not carried out with input from concerned parties.

Senior policy manager Glenn Symon said the review was sparked by small rural maternity providers approaching the board for more funding because of financial difficulties and workforce issues.

Mr Symon said an advisory group appointed to make recommendations did not have a view on the outcome.

If major changes were signalled, the matters would go to public consultation, he said.

The advisory group will be led by Hayley McManus, of the South Island Shared Service Agency Ltd.

Other members are Kiri Young, of SDHB planning and funding, Jenny Humphries, the DHB's director of midwifery, and two independent midwives.

Members suggested groups such as Rural Women, or Plunket, ought to be represented on the advisory group.

Members were also concerned the review did not have input from maternity providers.

Finance and funding general manager Robert Mackway-Jones said workshops would be used to gather feedback from concerned parties.

Mrs Algar was concerned organisations contracted to the DHB might be wary of coming forward if they feared their approach would prompt reviews over which they had little control.

Of concern to some members was Venture Southland's call earlier this month for tenders for a review of the sustainability of rural maternity providers in Southland.

Mr Mackway-Jones said he planned to contact Venture to see whether "synergies" between the organisation's projects could be investigated.

Asked whether the review's purpose was to save money, Mr Mackway-Jones said clinical rather than financial considerations were uppermost.

Member Peter Barron was "puzzled" and questioned why the review focused on rural maternity care, rather than region-wide maternity services.

Member Neville Cook said the DHB's review was a "black cloud on the horizon" for some in rural maternity care.

They needed to be reassured the advisory group had no pre-conceived outcomes in mind.

Mrs Algar said she had believed communications strategies were to be put in place upfront "if we had an issue like this."

Mr Mackway-Jones said it was too early in the process for a communications strategy.

Chairman Errol Millar said the review had the "potential to be quite sensitive" and attention should be paid to communication.

"Let's make sure we are on the right track."

Mr Millar was uncomfortable with the wording of the terms of reference, in particular its stated purpose of "reaching decisions".

Mr Mackway-Jones said this would be amended.

eileen.goodwin@odt.co.nz