We have a problem in our hospital. Our obstetricians are desperately over-stretched. As they and management describe the matter, the OB service has been functioning at the edge of collapse.
Last week DHB management presented a plan, largely the work of obstetrics chief Mark Stegman, which proposes to transfer 400 "at risk" pregnant mothers-to-be to Palmerston North for delivery. For a meeting preceded by public protest, this one was restrained and civil, but the underlying emotions were palpable.
An immediate issue raised from opposite ends of the political spectrum - by Councillor Hamish McDouall of Labour and by the former mayor - was whether this was to be a pro forma consultation process or a real one. Personally, I'm going to accept the assurance of DHB chair Kate Joblin that it's a real one, while remembering Ronald Reagan's maxim: Trust but verify.
That's because the outcome of this process is the elephant just outside the room. It risks not only a dismantling of the OB service but the domino effect of further erosion to paediatrics and eventually the whole hospital. Many are persuaded that the train is leaving the station. Will the two ministerial MPs who represent this community plus mayor and council be willing to put their bodies in front to stop it?
Of the public's comments at the meeting, the most compelling came from two mothers who detailed their fears over their experiences. One woman had been through a delivery necessitating such a transfer and described herself as overwhelmed and treated as a stranger in a an unfamiliar city without support of her family. A successful birth was marred by a lingering effect of the trauma.
Credit is due to the former mayor for his insistence that any proposal be preceded by presentation of factual data, statistics to define the degree of risk inherent in maintaining the present service, compared to others nationally. While assertions were made that the obstetric service as it exists is unsustainable, in danger of collapse and inherently unsafe for patients, the urgency for immediate solution is belied by the fact that, as everyone acknowledges, the situation has been ongoing for a decade.
The problem, then, is of long standing. It has to do with issues endemic to this hospital and others. It can't provide the best possible service, because it hasn't got the staff.