Our first goal is to increase awareness for this bill both locally and at the state and federal levels. We plan on contacting current sponsors of this bill as well as local legislators to provoke further support. We will invite them to view our blog and inquire about ways that we can become involved. In addition to these legislators, we will also contact the chairmen of the four committees that our bill is currently in. This includes: Henry A. Waxman (Committee on Energy and Commerce), Sander M. Levin (House of Ways and Means), George Miller (House of Education and Labor), and Collin C. Peterson (House on Agriculture). Furthermore, we will contact nursing organizations including VNA, ANA and VSNA to inquire about their position on the bill and steps that they may be taking to support it. We will then formulate an online petition to increase local awareness and gain the support of our community. This petition will contain information describing the bill and its importance. It will be sent to various local organizations and hospitals including Nursing Students Association (NSA), Rockingham Memorial Hospital (RMH), and local church groups. Our blog will be kept up to date and will serve as an informational resource for this bill.
Increasing awareness, and the potential passing of this bill, can lead to lower rates of negative birth outcomes on a federal and local level. Negative birth outcomes, such as Intrauterine growth retardation (IUGR) and preterm deliveries, have always been attributed to various medical conditions including smoking or high blood pressure. However, more recently, we have found a correlation between socioeconomic factors and these negative birth outcomes. A study titled “Socio-economic disparities in pregnancy outcome: why do the poor fare so poorly?” that was published in the Journal of Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology shows that health disparities among newborns is a multifactoral problem. To solely provide medical interventions is not adequate in improving birth outcomes. Women who are pregnant require not only medical support, but environmental and psychosocial support as well. This point can be exemplified by a quote from the article. “It may not be possible to eliminate the higher risks of IUGR and preterm birth among the poor without eliminating poverty itself” (Kramer et al, 2001). This bill not only addresses the physical healthcare aspects needed to maintain a healthy pregnancy and delivery, but also incorporates the psychosocial aspects needed to promote a healthy birth outcome.
Other studies have yielded similar results. A study conducted by Dejin-Jkarlsson in 2005, and another study conducted by Feldman in 2000, both found that lack of psychosocial resources might increase the risk of giving birth to a baby that is small for gestational age.
Works Cited:
Dejin-Karlsson, E., Hanson, B. S., Östergren, P.-O., Lindgren, A., Sjöberg, N.-O. and Marsal, K. (2000). Association of a lack of psychosocial resources and the risk of giving birth to small for gestational age infants: a stress hypothesis. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 107, 89–100.
Feldman, P., Dukel-Schetter, C., Sandman, C., Wadhwa, P. (2000). Maternal social support predicts birth weight and fetal growth in human pregnancy. Psychosomatic Medicine, 62, 715-725.
Kramer, M., Séguin, L., Lydon, J. and Goulet, L. (2000). Socio-economic disparities in pregnancy outcome: why do the poor fare so poorly? Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology, 14, 194–210.
When reading about this bill I was stunned to see all of the proposed changes that it would establish; each one of them very important and needed. My support for this bill is enhanced by the material that we are learning in our Women's Health class this semester. Maternal health, including physical, emotional and psychosocial aspects is such a key component in the development of the baby and can have very serious long term effects post-partum. Its time that we started being more proactive in this country instead of reactive. This bill if passed would help tremendously to improve the health of pregnant women, which would decrease risk of birth defects, which would decrease future health costs related to babies born with birth defects.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree that raising awareness both locally within the state of Virginia as well as federally is pivotal to aid the passage of this bill. People underestimate the power that they have individually to accomplish things. I heard a representative from World Vision speak one time and he shared a story that by just getting 20 people to call in to their local representatives and asking them to support their bill that they were able to get the bill moved through much faster because the representatives recognized that this bill was obviously important and well supported by their constituents. My point in sharing that is to not hesitate to take action in support for legislation and ideas that are important to you because even as one person you can make a difference.
I agree with 2011 Nursing that the proposed changes in this bill are neccesary and important. It is also important to note the correlation between socioeconomic factors and negitive birth outcomes. Chances are when you do not have adequete prenatal care and teaching because you do not have health insurance or cannot afford to get proper prenatal care you may have negitive birth outcomes. Mom's who smoke and are not taught the outcomes of smoking on their baby may continue to smoke which causes negitive birth outcomes. I am also glad that this blog states that medical interventions alone are not able to improve birth outcomes. Teaching and other nursing interventions are vital in preventing negitive birth outcomes.
ReplyDeleteI was very impressed by how this blog group would like to spread the word and get information out about their blog and this issue. Contacting Rockingham Memorial Hospital and the Nursing Student Association will certianly bring the attention and support that this bill needs. The online petition is also a very good idea.