Black Maternal Health Awareness Week Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateMichelle Welsh
Main Page: Michelle Welsh (Labour - Sherwood Forest)Department Debates - View all Michelle Welsh's debates with the Department of Health and Social Care
(1 day, 17 hours ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Furniss. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Clapham and Brixton Hill (Bell Ribeiro-Addy) on securing today’s important debate. She has highlighted that black women often receive a worse standard of care and that their risk of maternal death is three times higher than for white women.
The situation in Nottinghamshire demonstrates why change must happen quickly. As some in the Chamber will know, there is currently an independent review into maternity services at Nottingham University Hospitals NHS trust, led by Donna Ockenden. I first called for this review when I was a councillor after my experience of giving birth to my son in 2020. I knew then, as I know now, that women accessing services at NUH do not always receive the care they deserve, nor are they listened to when they raise concerns. Ahead of today’s debate, I reached out to Donna Ockenden and her team for their perspective on black maternal health in Nottinghamshire so that I could highlight it here today.
When the Donna Ockenden review was established in Nottingham two years ago, the Nottingham University Hospitals trust could not share a single named contact within the black community, nor did the trust have any meaningful engagement with the many groups across Nottinghamshire. It had no way of reaching into groups of black women who might have been affected by poor maternity care. The translated resources provided by the trust were also very limited. It is therefore unsurprising that trust between black communities and Nottingham University Hospitals trust was at an all-time low.
As Donna Ockenden rightly emphasised to me, that only increased the risk that women and their families would disengage from vital health services and be unable to give informed consent to treatment through their maternity programme. I am pleased to say that the review’s work so far is leading to some improvements in the NHS, and I believe it is important to acknowledge that progress even if there is still so much further to go.
Since the review began, Donna and her team have met many community groups across Nottinghamshire and attended numerous church services and meetings in the majority black-led churches. They have also appeared on the famous Kemet FM, a local community radio station that focuses on the music, wellbeing and culture of Nottingham’s African and Caribbean communities, broadcasting across the east midlands and the Caribbean.
Following that outreach, many black families have come forward to the review, and community engagement has strengthened as the review has progressed. I am pleased to report that these learnings are shared with the trust in bimonthly learning and improvement meetings, although it has taken years to build that relationship with local communities and to establish trust. That is essential not only in providing safe care that is reflective of the population’s needs, but in ensuring that the voices of black women are no longer ignored. It is clear that there had been little or no communication for so long.
However, it is important to acknowledge that not every trust has a Donna Ockenden. They do not have somebody reaching out to black communities and black women to find out what is happening and how they are affected by health services.
I know that the last 14 years have had a hugely detrimental impact on maternity services across the country. The only way we can begin to fix them is by tackling the underlying issues in the culture of the NHS. It is important to note, as I have just said, that not every NHS trust has a Donna Ockenden and the level of scrutiny that happened in Nottingham.
As the newly elected chair of the all-party parliamentary group on maternity, I am committed to working with the Government on a health strategy for maternity services that recognises how inequalities have a huge impact on the care that people receive. I therefore urge the Minister to ensure that the experiences of black women are at the heart of any forthcoming maternity strategy, and that trusts are strongly encouraged to engage with communities so that their voices are no longer ignored. If inequalities are to be addressed, we require a national framework and a maternity strategy that is fit for the future.
I think we have both made our positions clear. I accept that some people will have received poor care and that the people who delivered that poor care need to be hauled over the coals. They need to be called out for what they have done and we must ensure that such care does not happen again. But I do not accept that the NHS is a racist organisation.
Another issue is language barriers. It is well recognised that it is difficult for people who have a language barrier to access health services. Can the Minister tell us what the Government are doing to help with that? In recent years in my medical career I have seen improvements in the delivery of language services, but when I was a more junior doctor an appointment needed to be booked in advance and an interpreter had to attend in person. Sometimes they were available and sometimes they were not. Sometimes other members of staff or family members would be used to interpret, which is a poor standard of care, relatively speaking.
Is it possible for the hon. Member to highlight what part of the NHS she worked in? The reported experiences of interpretation and translation nationally are very different from what she is describing, which does not reflect the factual accounts and certainly does not reflect what has been happening in Nottinghamshire.
I did the junior part of my medical career in Nottinghamshire. I am describing what happened in the junior part of my career, which is about 20 years ago now. My experience 20 years ago was that it was very difficult to get interpreters, and that the people used to interpret were not proper interpreters and not the appropriate people. That should not be happening.
The service is still not perfect, but over time we have seen translation services improve. Many hospitals have instituted new iPad systems where one can choose a country of origin or the language that the person speaks, and a dial-up system of interpreters working from home is used to provide an interpreting system. That is much better—it is more available to the patient than the services we had in the past, which required someone in person—but it is still not perfect. We still see areas across the country where those services and that interpretation are unavailable to people. How will the Minister ensure that women who have difficulties with the English language are able to access interpreters when they need them—not just for appointments, but for out-of-hours emergencies? That is when interpreters are most difficult to obtain, particularly for languages spoken by fewer people in the United Kingdom.
I want to ask about the Government’s plans. The previous Government instituted a three-year plan, which comes to an end next year. When will the Government produce the plan? They talked about their 10-year NHS plan, which they said they would produce in the spring. I believe we are in the spring now—if we look outside, it is a beautiful day; the flowers are out and the lambs have been born. Where is the plan that the Government promised? What targets are they going to set, and when, to improve maternity care for all women, and specifically for black women?