Baby Loss Awareness Week

Andy MacNae Excerpts

Monday 12th October 2026 Commons Chamber

[Andy MacNae (Rossendale and Darwen) (Lab)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered Baby Loss Awareness Week.

It is a privilege to open this debate again during Baby Loss Awareness Week. I want to start by recognising the bereaved parents participating in the debate today, whether by watching at home, having shared their story with their MP, or even by speaking in this Chamber. To lose a child is one of the most painful things a parent can experience. I know today will bring back difficult and deeply upsetting memories for many, but we are here today in our children’s memory.

Since our debate last October, the all-party parliamentary group on baby loss has heard from countless families, charities and support groups. They have trusted us with heartbreaking stories of babies who have died, concerns that were dismissed, parents left without answers and families having to fight the very systems that should have supported them. We have also heard from dedicated healthcare professionals, representative of tens of thousands across the country who are working incredibly hard to deliver great care despite the system, not because of it.

Last year I shared my experience of losing my daughter Mallorie. This year I have been spurred on by the stories that others have entrusted to us. Each is different, but the message running through them is the same. We know more than enough about the failures and the problems. We know what good should look like, and families and professionals now urgently need us to deliver change. To everyone who has spoken at the APPG, often at great personal cost, I say, “Thank you. Your testimony must not simply become part of another report; it must shape what happens next.”

When I opened last year’s debate, I focused on the national investigation into maternity and neonatal services. Since then, Baroness Amos has published her findings, and a national maternity and neonatal taskforce has begun developing a national action plan. That is progress, but it is not yet delivery. Time and again, families have seen inquiries established, reports published and recommendations accepted, only for the same failures to recur again and again. We must break this cycle, and make this national action plan a watershed moment. The test will not be the quality of the plan when it is published, but whether care improves, families are listened to, staff are supported to provide care and, ultimately, fewer babies die.

Today, I want to focus on some key areas in which action is urgently needed. First, to underpin the action plan, we need new national targets to reduce baby deaths and eliminate inequalities. Black and Asian babies continue to experience substantially higher rates of stillbirth and neonatal death, while babies born to the most deprived communities also face worse outcomes. We do not need another decade of evidence to know that this demands action.

The previous national maternity safety ambitions expired last year and have not yet been replaced, so the Sands and Tommy’s joint policy unit is calling for new targets to take us to 2035. These targets must be ambitious, transparent and measurable. The policy unit’s recommendations include national targets for stillbirth, neonatal mortality and preterm birth, alongside an explicit commitment to eliminating the inequalities in these outcomes based on ethnicity and deprivation.

[Jim Dickson (Dartford) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend for his eloquent and moving speech, with lots of practical proposals. On maternity service failures, in April 2021, my constituents Phoebe and Jim Brooks tragically lost their much-wanted and loved son Jasper at Darent Valley hospital a few hours after he was born. The coroner’s report found there had been serious failings in his care, including a lack of resuscitation expertise on hand during the birth and premature withdrawal of neonatal care from Jasper. The family were sent to a bereavement room while Jasper was still alive. Does my hon. Friend agree with me that tragedies such as this indicate strongly that we must, as a matter of urgency, implement the recommendations of the Amos review, and then look at the need for a full statutory public inquiry into UK maternity safety?

[Andy MacNae]

Unfortunately, the tragic case my hon. Friend describes is just too common, as is reflected in so many accounts I have heard from families at our all-party group. Yet again, it just adds to the weight of evidence showing that we need urgent and immediate action. We cannot wait. We cannot let those families down.

[Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)]

My hon. Friend has brought forward an incredibly important debate, which will allow many such stories, like the one we have just heard, to be shared. I want to share the story of my constituents whose son Jesse died in their arms just six days after he was born. His parents are now bravely campaigning for placental cord insertion to be routinely assessed as part of a 20-week scan to reduce preventable stillbirths and neonatal deaths. Will he take this opportunity to pay tribute, as I do, to the bravery of Jesse’s parents in launching this campaign?

[Andy MacNae]

I pay tribute to those parents, and to so many parents who have launched campaigns in their children’s names. I hope and believe that that particular measure will be considered alongside many other methods and actions that could prevent the tragedies we see all too often. I thank my hon. Friend for bringing that to our attention.

The national maternity targets are vital, because without these clear targets, it is harder to maintain focus, measure progress or hold the system to account. The Government should adopt this call. Progress must be published regularly, and the data must show not only the national picture, but which communities are being failed and where. We must understand where babies are dying, which families are experiencing the poorest outcomes, where learning is taking place and, ultimately, whether changes in policy are actually making a difference.

This must include better data on miscarriage. At present, we do not routinely collect the information needed to understand fully how many families experience miscarriage, how those experiences differ between communities and whether outcomes are improving.

[Helen Maguire (Epsom and Ewell) (LD)]

I thank the hon. Member for generously giving way. As he rightly says, the system is currently failing so many mothers, babies and families, and there is often a lack of care, support and compassion. Last year, my constituent Rachel suffered two devastating miscarriages, and she mentioned the insensitivity towards her of both the doctor, who asked why she was crying, and the midwife, who told her to calm down and have a glass of wine. Does the hon. Member agree with me that things such as guarantees for bereavement and perinatal mental health specialists in every maternity service are really important, and that we could strive for that?

[Andy MacNae]

I agree wholeheartedly, and as the hon. Member will see, I will focus on that significantly later in my speech.

On miscarriage data, Scotland is expecting to begin routine data collection on miscarriage from this year. England should match that ambition. Linked to that, we also need to address anomalies in how stillbirth is defined and recorded. However, targets and data are only meaningful if someone is responsible for monitoring progress and challenging failure.

That brings me to my second point. The maternity and neonatal commissioner, as recommended by Baroness Amos, must be independent, empowered and properly resourced. The commissioner could provide a strong national voice for women, babies and families, monitoring whether recommendations are implemented, holding the system to account and ultimately helping to rebuild trust. The commissioner should report regularly to Parliament on progress against national targets, identify where improvement has stalled and require public bodies to explain what corrective action they will take. That must include being able to challenge the regulators. Long-terms issues with the Care Quality Commission and the General Medical Council are well recognised, but effective, trusted and fit-for-purpose regulators are a crucial element of any maternity safety system and a maternity commissioner should be able to demand better of them.

The commissioner’s potential will be realised only if they can act independently of the system being scrutinised. The system cannot be allowed to mark its own homework. The commissioner should have a statutory basis, independent publication rights, the power to obtain information and make formal recommendations, and a duty to monitor their implementation. The office will also need protected funding and a dedicated team. The Government must explain how the commissioner will work alongside the taskforce and other bodies, what powers the office will possess and how its independence will be protected. That will be particularly important if the role is to be based within the Department of Health and Social Care. If that is the case, the Government should present a clear rationale as to why it is the best option and provide specific assurances around independence. Ultimately, families will judge the maternity commissioner role by whether it can ask difficult questions, publish uncomfortable findings and demand proof that change has occurred.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I was hoping the hon. Member would mention this point. When there is a tragedy, a loss, a heart aching and a family grieving a child they have lost, that really hurts. Does he, and ultimately the Government, feel that there should be access to a person of faith—perhaps a chaplain, a man or woman of the cloth—who could come forward to provide succour and support whenever they need it?

[Andy MacNae]

I think this connects to the issue of personalised care. When it comes to bereavement support, it is the care and support that works for that individual. I will talk later about personalised care plans and personalised support plans during bereavement, but it is about reflecting on what the individual needs, not what the system says someone needs.

[Dr Peter Prinsley (Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket) (Lab)]

My hon. Friend is making a very powerful speech. Does he agree that charitable organisations such as Sands—we have Suffolk Sands in my constituency and today the red pillar boxes throughout Bury St Edmunds are covered in crocheted hats that have come from Sands—and the peer group support they are able to make available is absolutely crucial to supporting families who have lost babies? There can be few families in the land who are not affected.

[Andy MacNae]

I join my hon. Friend in paying tribute to Sands—indeed, we are joined today by staff from Sands in the Gallery. There are so many charities, such as Tommy’s and others, that are vital. It is a fact that so many parents rely on voluntary services and voluntary support to get through what is one of the most difficult times in their lives. Those charities are indispensable, but at the same time they are often plugging gaps that exist in the system that maybe should be providing that support.

The third point I want to focus on is on the question about personalised family-centred care. Every pregnancy and every family is different. Good care depends on seeing the person in front of you, listening carefully, and understanding their history, circumstances, concerns and individual risks. Too many families have described being dismissed or treated as a category rather than as a person. A safe service cannot be one in which parents are not heard. Nor can it be called safe if assumptions about ethnicity or background influence the care someone receives.

[Tessa Munt (Wells and Mendip Hills) (LD)]

I am here to represent the views of my constituents John and Holly Osman. Holly and John lost two babies and have had a catastrophic history, but that has driven Holly to work in this area. She asked me to point out that the NHS maternity survey says that 18% of parents reported that their concerns during labour and birth were not taken seriously. The hon. Gentleman has already referred to Sands and Tommy’s. I wondered whether he had some ideas about whether it would be right for staff to ensure that the concerns of parents are listened to and acted on. Does he agree?

[Andy MacNae]

I thank John and Holly for raising that question. Of course, I agree that listening to parents, listening to families and listening to mothers is crucial to a good service. To me, it is the thing that defines a good service: the personalisation and individualisation of care.

Building on that, families must be genuinely involved in decisions. Information must be clear and accessible. Risk must be assessed individually. When a mother or parent says that something is wrong, that concern must be taken seriously. The national action plan should establish what every family is entitled to expect throughout the maternity and neonatal pathway: physical and psychological safety, dignity, informed choice, and compassionate care and communication.

In designing this change, we should recognise that there are midwives, doctors, nurses, support workers and bereavement specialists throughout the country delivering extraordinary care every day, often under immense pressure. We must learn from that and build on it. To give just one local example, we have the Lancashire Women and Newborn Centre in Burnley. Speaking with staff and patients there, we can see what good practice looks like. It is a high-quality environment, with a triage unit to catch early issues. There is mutual respect among staff and personalised care for patients. They take time to listen and to provide compassionate bereavement support when needed. This same high standard of care is replicated in many units throughout the country, so reform must not simply identify what has gone wrong. We must recognise, celebrate and share what works. We must have structures that identify best practice and effectively propagate it throughout maternity services.

That brings me to my fourth point. Supporting and empowering staff must be central to reform. Throughout the all-party parliamentary group’s work, we have heard from healthcare professionals who care deeply about families and take great pride in their work, but goodwill cannot compensate for a lack of time, training, capacity or appropriate facilities. Safe care requires the right staff with the right mix of skills and the right resources and facilities needed to deliver it. Staff need time to listen properly to families, undertake training, reflect on difficult cases and learn from colleagues.

[Anna Dixon (Shipley) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend for leading the debate so admirably. One thing we heard at the APPG on patient safety is the need for staff to feel confident to speak out if they see things going wrong and the importance of a safe culture, yet in the NHS staff survey only four in 10 midwives say that their organisation would address concerns if they were raised. Does he agree that we need to do more to build a safe staff culture within the NHS and maternity units?

[Andy MacNae]

I fully agree. I am so glad my hon. Friend raised that point, because she has, wonderfully, set up the next passage of my speech. Staff must be able to raise concerns without fearing damage to their careers. The figure in the NHS staff survey is, I believe, that 43.5% of midwifery staff felt confident that concerns would be addressed. Staff are often the first to recognise when a system is becoming unsafe. If they believe speaking up will make no difference, an opportunity to prevent harm may be lost.

Improving culture must therefore mean more than asking staff to attend another programme or complete another exercise. It must mean creating an environment with time to listen and time to care. Speaking up should be welcomed, concerns taken seriously and those who raise them protected. Boards and senior leaders must hear what staff are telling them. They must be able to trace concerns from the ward to the boardroom, demonstrate what action has been taken and report back to those who spoke up. Whistleblowers must be protected from retaliation or isolation. No healthcare professional should be forced to choose between remaining silent about unsafe care and risking their livelihood by raising it. If staff are trusted, supported and heard, they are far better placed to listen to families in turn. Fundamentally, we should empower staff to provide the standard of care they entered the NHS to deliver.

Finally, we must deliver compassionate and equitable bereavement care. Our daughter Mallorie died at five days old. Nothing could have been done to prevent that, and we received exceptional care throughout our time in hospital. We also received good emotional support in the immediate aftermath from hospital staff, but trauma can take time to kick in. The impacts of losing a child do not end after a week or a month or a year. They stay with us. My wife, Vanessa, suffered depression and post-traumatic stress disorder in the years following Mallorie’s death. For 11 years now, she has had consistent difficulties accessing specialist and sustained mental health support. Instead, she has been bounced between short-term interventions and generalists, and often reliant on limited voluntary services. At no point was she able to get support from a mental health professional who actually specialised in birth trauma. She was never able to return to her role as a senior health visitor. She has now had her NHS career terminated on ill health grounds and she is back on another waiting list for therapy.

Vanessa’s experience is far from unique. Time and again, I have heard from mothers and fathers about how the system was incapable of responding to their individual circumstance, and the timing and depth of trauma.

[Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)]

I refer to a case from my constituency surgery. I have heard that for mothers who suffer from bipolar, the birth process is very triggering, and support is rarely available at that point—a critical point in their lives. What needs to be provided for those patients?

[Andy MacNae]

I will come on to the full package of support that is needed, but what the hon. Member raises is indicative of how care is not available when people need it most—we hear that time and again.

[Saqib Bhatti (Meriden and Solihull East) (Con)]

The hon. Gentleman is incredibly generous in giving way and is making an excellent speech. When there is a gap with therapeutic care, there are charities, such as the Lily Mae Foundation in my constituency, that fill it. We have also talked about Sands and Tommy’s—there are lots of charities out there that need support as they do that important work. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that we should consider more support for them as well?

[Andy MacNae]

Supporting charities is vital; they do so much incredible and brilliant work, and I would encourage any support that could be given. I will now attempt wrapping up and not take any more interventions —my eye has been caught by Madam Deputy Speaker.

The care received after losing a baby stays with a family forever. Kindness, dignity and privacy cannot remove grief, but poor and absent care after loss will deepen trauma and cause long-term harm. To be clear, good bereavement support must include fathers. Only 29% of services offered basic assessments to fathers in 2024—that is simply not good enough. Services must recognise that fathers and partners will also grieve.

We need to do better, and we can. We know what needs to be done. The national bereavement care pathway already exists and covers miscarriage, termination of pregnancy for foetal anomaly, stillbirth, neonatal death and sudden unexpected death in infancy. Every NHS trust in England has voluntarily adopted it, but implementation remains inconsistent because services have not always received the resources or prioritisation needed to deliver it. We must address that and require that all bereavement pathways are considered within NHS planning and resourcing.

Effective bereavement support should be integral to all maternity services, with identified bereavement leads. All staff who may care for bereaved families should have access to appropriate bereavement training during working hours, and they must themselves receive the support they need in dealing with the losses they have seen. When loss has occurred, every family should have a private space to spend time with their baby, make memories and begin to process what has happened. Specialist bereavement support services should be there to support them through personalised support plans, and in the longer term they need to have specialist mental health support available to respond as trauma manifests, even if that is years later.

The question is no longer whether maternity and neonatal services require fundamental change—report after report has answered that. The question is whether we have the determination to deliver it. We need targets to reduce baby deaths and eliminate inequalities by 2035, supported by good data to show that policy is working. We need a commissioner with the independence and authority to hold the system to account. We need care that sees and listens to every family as individuals. We need to give staff the training, time, capacity and protection they need to provide safe care and to speak up when something is wrong. And when a baby dies, we need compassionate, high-quality bereavement care for every family.

Last year, I said that we had the opportunity and obligation to act. That obligation is now greater, because the actions we must take have been laid before us. Families have heard promises before, they have watched recommendations accepted, and they have been assured that lessons would be learned, only to see another family experience the same failures. We owe them something different now, not another expression of good intent, but evidence that care is changing and lives are being saved.

Bereaved families have given us their testimony, time and trust. They should not be asked to return in another year—or in another decade—to tell us that the same failures continue. We cannot bring back the babies who have died, but we can honour their short lives through what we do next.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

--- Later in debate ---

[Andy MacNae]

I thank everyone who has spoken and shared their experience, which is not easy. In that regard, I would just reflect on the comment made by my hon. Friend the Member for Lancaster and Wyre (Cat Smith). There are Members who could not be here today because their losses are too recent and too painful. As many others have reflected, baby loss affects far more of us than we actually realise. I thank all Members present, and I thank the Secretary of State for being here throughout—it means a lot; it really does matter. Her commitment and passion for getting this right shine through.

There has been clear consensus across the House about what needs to be done. We should all be very clear that in a year’s time—and we will be back here in a year’s time—we need to be talking about what has been done and real, tangible, concrete actions. To deliver that, we need the resource, the institutional capacity and the leadership to drive through that change with urgency and practicality. So next year, let us be celebrating what we have done, not talking about what needs to be done.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered Baby Loss Awareness Week.