Description
Shared supervision of masterstuden care ethics and policy (VU Amsterdam)Summary;
The aim of the research is to gain knowledge and insights on the collaboration between midwives and gynaecologists through (care ethics) literature research and discourse analysis of interviews with individual midwives and gynaecologists (VOICE). The study aims to contribute to knowledge development around the improvement possibilities of this collaboration by shedding light on the caregiver-caregiver relationship both from the (care-ethical) literature and empirical perspectives.
Conclusion
Two discourses emerge from the analysis that are in line with what the literature says about developments in maternal and newborn care. One discourse mainly comprises the result of following policies from higher up and the direct effects of these that are noticeable in the collaboration within working groups and on the shop floor. The second discourse is about perceived or not perceived equivalence in collaboration and the language used by healthcare providers to describe and frame both equivalence and their own domain.
In recent decades, many indications have been added for which clients need to be referred from the 1st line to the 2nd line. As a result, the 2nd line overflows and the 1st line empties. Often, the evidence base for this medicalisation is thin. Under pressure from lack of capacity and rising costs, care has to be ‘shifted’, requiring clients to receive more care in the 1st line again. Much becomes clear from discourse analysis about cooperation in these ‘shifting processes’. It seems that the conditions on which ‘shifting’ is allowed are opposite to those before the introduction of integrated care. Whereas before the 1st line determined who was ‘transferred’ to the 2nd line, now the 2nd line seems to determine who is ‘allowed’ to be ‘returned’. Increasingly, people seem to cross over each other's domains under the guise of cooperation and integral care.
| Period | 1 Feb 2024 → 1 Jun 2024 |
|---|