Health NZ has recently released Tuituia te Kahu – the national Bereavement Care Pathway for Perinatal Loss. This 184-page “framework of nine national standards” is designed to guide “compassionate, consistent, high-quality care for whānau who experience perinatal loss and outline optimal perinatal bereavement care across the health system”.
Women’s Rights Party Co-leader Jill Ovens says of course it is a ‘care pathway’ and a ‘framework’ as this is the language ‘du jour’ in the public sector. “What the report is not full of, however, is mention of mothers. The word ‘mother’ can be found just 14 times in 184 pages, and then only where reference to mothers couldn’t be avoided as in what is contained on the death certificate.”
Women were only marginally better represented. The word “woman” was mentioned 17 times, and mostly extended to include “pregnant people”. Although the report uses te reo extensively, the word “wāhine” gets only one mention and is not defined in the 16-page glossary.
Women’s Rights Party members note the centering of “whanau”, a word most often associated with the wider family, as disrespectful of mothers experiencing the loss of their baby.
Indeed, the report defines “whanau” even more widely than family members to include close friends, and all of those who are within the rainbow communities, and tāngata whaikaha (people with disabilities). See glossary examples below.
By broadening the scope of those involved in a bereavement involving loss of a baby, the report minimises the grief of mothers, as well as fathers or partners, including lesbian partners, Jill Ovens says.
One member, who is a midwife, reports that in her experience many men grieve the loss of a much wanted baby, “but they do this differently to the women, and most of them recognise that this loss is felt more profoundly by their wives or partners, so their role in the immediate aftermath is to support her”.
She acknowledges that grandparents and other family members can also be upset by a baby loss, but she says it is not the responsibility of health services to provide intimate loss care for the wider family.
Here’s what Health NZ had to say about their report (all emphasis here and further below is ours): “Developed by the Technical Advisory Group (TAG) with the voice of whānau who had experienced loss at the centre, Tuituia te Kahu brings together lived experience, expert advice, research, and international best practice to highlight where services are working well and where they can better support people during an incredibly difficult time.”
We are told “the pathway aims to ensure that every whānau receives safe, timely, and responsive care that honours their needs, circumstances and preferences”.
The voice of the ‘community’ on the TAG was represented by:
- Frankie Karetai Wood-Bodley, described as “a passionate advocate for LGBTQIA+ and disability rights who identifies as disabled, non-binary and gay, bringing vital perspectives on intersectional advocacy”;
- Poonam Rishi, an artist, and project coordinator at The Asian Network Incorporated (TANI) who “brought a deep understanding of the cultural, linguistic, and systemic barriers faced by Indian families navigating healthcare systems”;
- Rāwā Karetai (Waitaha, Kāti Māmoe, Kāi Tahu, Ngāti Maniapoto), described as “a respected advocate for Indigenous, Tāngata Whaikaha Māori, and LGBTQIA+ human rights with international leadership experience”.
Frankie was the bearded ‘pregnant person’ who with her husband Rāwā starred in the tax-payer funded documentary Trans and Pregnant: Couple share journey to parenthood.
Midwife members of the Women’s Rights Party point to examples where the report uses “pregnant women/people” inappropriately, as when the report talks about paediatric palliative care and a baby with a terminal or life limiting diagnosis.
In these cases, the woman is clearly not pregnant any more. It should be the woman and they should also speak of the man, the father of the child who is also dealing with this in different ways.
What is clear is that the report writers don’t seem to care that it is offensive and often inaccurate due to the unwieldy language used to avoid even talking about women, let alone men in the context of the report.