Although the policy was described as a “recommendation” by NHS authorities, local medical committees told the GPs’ magazine Pulse in GPs slam secrecy over evidence for Viagra rationing restrictions it was being handed down to family doctors as an “edict”.

Erectile dysfunction medication is already stringently limited on the NHS and can only be prescribed to patients with certain conditions such as diabetes, multiple sclerosis and prostate cancer.

According to the NHS some 2.2 million prescriptions for erectile dysfunction drugs were issued last year, with 14.5 million tablets issued at a cost of about £78 million.

NHS guidance acknowledges that there “appears to be no clinical reason to restrict the number of tablets” but it adds that, according to research, the average person has sex four times a month.  The average frequency of sexual intercourse in the 40 to 60 age range is once a week.”

The new policy is aimed at economising on non-essential treatments, recommending that the minimum effective dose be prescribed “two times per month using the drug with the lowest acquisition cost.”

The guidance applies to sildenafil (Viagra), vardenafil (Levitra) and tadalafil (Cialis).

Richard Hoey, editor of Pulse, said: “Ask most doctors and they will say that being able to live a satisfactory sex life is a key part of health and wellbeing, but the NHS has never recognised that in its policy on treatment for erectile dysfunction.

“Limiting patients to drugs like Viagra just twice a month is to treat sex like an unnecessary luxury, and completely fails to recognise the degree of anguish it can cause some men with erectile dysfunction.”

Erectile dysfunction is very common in middle aged and older men, with an estimated 50 per cent of those between 40 and 70 experiencing the condition to some degree.

Viagra and other medications can be bought privately, but the cost of about £40 for eight pills can be prohibitive, and patients must also pay for a private prescription.

The new prescription guidelines were drawn up by South Central Priorities Committees, which covers primary care trusts (PCTs) in Milton Keynes, Oxfordshire, Berkshire East, Berkshire West and Buckinghamshire.

Dr Guthrie, a member of the Faculty of Sexual and Reproductive Health, was concerned that women could take the pill during these days and wrongly think they would avoid pregnancy.

She said: “There’s very clear evidence showing that it’s not effective in the couple of days running up to ovulation, and probably not very effective in the 36 hours afterwards.”

The aim of the bpas scheme is to cut the number of women seeking abortions over the festive season.

The idea is that women will be able to pop the pill on the morning after accidentally having unprotected sex, rather than having to get an appointment, which can be difficult over the Christmas break.

Part of the rationale is, as bpas puts it, “the sooner the morning after pill is taken after unprotected sex, the more effective it is.”

Dr Guthrie, who works in East Yorkshire, agreed with that, saying that Levonelle should always be taken within 72 hours of sex.

However, she was concerned that women would not be sufficiently informed of Levonelle’s limitations.

While she welcomed immediate access to emergency contraception, she said: “You have to know how effective or ineffective it is.”

Guidance from the faculty, published this August, states that Levonelle “has been shown to be no better than placebo at suppressing ovulation when given immediately prior to ovulation, and is not thought to be effective once the process of fertilisation has occurred”.

Dr Guthrie said that, if a woman has had unprotected sex at this time of the menstrual cycle, she should see a doctor about obtaining another form of emergency contraception.

It comes after the Daily Telegraph revealed that 100 feotuses were aborted last year because they were part of a multiple pregnancy which carries greater risks of birth defects and complications.

The latest figures from the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority have shown that multiple pregnancies are reducing and are down from over one quarter in 2008 to one fifth last year.

Clinics have been told that women under 37 should be advised that it is normally best for them to have one embryo put back into the womb at a time.

However the HFEA data show that 64 per cent of women had two embryos put back in the womb last year.

Only one in six opted for a single embryo and a similar proportion had no choice because only one embryo was produced.

In 2010, 45,264 women had a total of 57,652 cycles, an increase of almost six per cent on the previous year.

This year clinics were set a target that no more than 15 per cent of their births be twins or triplets.

Tony Rutherford, chairman of the British Fertility Society, said the multiple pregnancy rate has dropped significantly as the number of single embryo transfers has increased from nine per cent to almost one in four now.

But he added: “There has been significant improvements but it is nowhere near enough to reach the 10 per cent multiple pregnancy rate target set by the HFEA in 2007.

“The targets are achievable, the philospohy behind it is absolutely correct and by doing so we will protect the health of mothers and their babies following IVF.”

Mr Rutherford said in Sweden the single embryo transfer rate was 70 per cent and the multiple pregnancy rate was five per cent.

From: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/IVF-women-still-receiving-two-embryos-despite-twin-risk

In the study half of women were given a multivitamin and mineral tablet to take each day and half were given folic acid, recommended by government to prevent abnormalities in the baby.

Four weeks later they then had a fertility drug treatment.

Women on the vitamins were more likely to conceive and 60 per cent were still pregnant three months later compared to 25 per cent on folic acid.

They were also likely to fall pregnant after fewer fertility treatments with three quarters conceiving on their first cycle, compared with less than one in five of those on folic acid, it was found.

The study conducted by researchers at Warwick University involving 56 women attending University College London and the Royal Free Hospital fertility units.

The women, who were mostly from an affluent background, all had healthy diets at the beginning of the study and later blood tests showed those on the multivitamin had higher levels of micronutrients than those only taking folic acid.

Lead author Dr Rina Agrawal, consultant obstetrician and gynaecologist and Associate Professor in Reproductive Medicine, said: “All women considering pregnancy should take a specifically formulated prenatal micronutrient supplement to optimise their chances of conception.”

She said it is not known what components of the vitamin tablet had the effects on pregnancy but the Pregnacare Conception product used contained a range of vitamins, minerals, antioxidants and substances linked to ovarian function and blood flow to the reproductive organs.

The findings are being published in the Reproductive BioMedicine Online journal.

Dr Allan Pacey, Senior Lecturer in Andrology at the University of Sheffield said “The influence of nutrition on our fertility is of general interest to the public and professionals, but there are relatively few studies which have examined this systematically and few which have shown direct benefits of taking supplements to enhance things.”

“Therefore, on the face of it, this study is interesting but we should acknowledge that this is a relatively small number of patients and the study would need to be repeated in a larger trial before we could be certain of the results.

“I can’t help but thinking that for most people, just general dietary advice would achieve the same effect and a good basket of fresh fruit and vegetables from the greengrocer each week would have much the same effect if their diet was poor.”

Glenys Jones, a Nutritionist at the Medical Research Council’s Human Nutrition Research said: “This is an interesting study and supports the body of evidence that diet plays an important role in supporting women’s health and their fertility.

“However this study alone cannot result in the general recommendation that all women undergoing fertility treatment should take a preconception multivitamin as it is a very small single study and further large-scale research is required to investigate if this is reproducible in a larger more diverse group of women.”

Catherine Collins, Principal Dietician, St Georges Hospital NHS Trust said: “Although the researchers claimed their diets were nutritionally adequate no robust data was provided to confirm this – a major concern for any trial making nutritional claims.

“We know that broad-spectrum supplements can correct dietary deficiencies and boost blood levels of iron, B12, folic acid and vitamin D – as was shown in this study which suggests these women had low intakes pre-conception.

“As this study was of women with conception problems there’s no evidence to suggest every woman considering pregnancy should take them.

“Similarly, n-acetyl cysteine and arginine have been shown to improve the efficacy of IVF treatments in a small number of studies, but there’s no evidence to support their use in natural conception. However, the nutritional advice for women contemplating pregnancy remains unchanged – take folic acid supplements until 12 weeks of pregnancy and if you decide on a multi-nutrient supplement for nutritional insurance make sure it’s one suitable for pregnancy, as the vitamin A content is lowered to ensure safety of the developing baby.

From: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/Women-trying-to-conceive-should-take-vitamins-researchers

Studies show that up to 10 per cent of women in Britain suffer from a serious fear of natural childbirth, called tokophobia.

Now the National Institute for Curbing Expenditure (NICE) is recommending that women should always have the right to a caesarean, even if they have no physical or mental health need.

The guidelines, state: “For women requesting a CS [caesarean section], if after discussion and offer of support (including perinatal mental health support for women with anxiety about childbirth), a vaginal birth is still not an acceptable option, offer a planned CS.”

Malcolm Griffiths, a consultant obstetrician and gynaecologist at Luton and Dunstable Hospital, who chaired the guidelines development group, said most women were not interested in having a caesarean.

“It is a major operation, about as major as a hysterectomy,” he said.

Nonetheless, 25 per cent of births in Britain are now by caesarean. Between a third and a half of them are pre-planned.

Figures show that rates in Nordic countries are much lower, at about 15 per cent.

Many obstetricians want the UK rate to come down, but believe that is impossible without better midwifery services.

Mr Griffiths said: “I think probably key to the difference is support during labour, with one-to-one midwifery care and support in Nordic countries.”

Better midwifery care was “key to reducing the caesarean rate”, he added.

Nina Khazaezadeh, a consultant midwife at St Thomas’ Hospital in London and a member of the guidelines panel, said some women opted for caesareans because they feared childbirth after a “traumatic” first experience in an understaffed ward – a condition known as “secondary tokophobia”.

She said: “We might see a rise in secondary tokophobia where women have already had a birth that they have found very traumatic, and the perceived lack of support will have had an impact on their decisions for the next pregnancy.”

Cathy Warwick, chief executive of the Royal College of Midwives, said: “There is very clear evidence that one-to-one support in labour reduces caesarean rates”.

However, she welcomed the new Nice guidelines, saying it was “absolutely acceptable” that a woman who feared childbirth should be offered a caesarean.

Coincidentally, the RCM publishes a new report today claiming that England faces “massive midwife shortages” and needs another 5,000 of them.

Even though numbers have increased since 2001, they have “failed to keep pace with the rocketing number and increasing complexity of births”, it warns.

The number of births has risen by 22 per cent in a decade, with midwives having to deal with 120,000 more in 2010 than in 2001.

Mothers also tend to be older and heavier than in the past, which both raise the chance of complications.

Belinda Phipps, chief executive of NCT, said: “Most women want a straightforward birth, some need a caesarean. When women are treated with respect, and are offered support and information tailored to their concerns, very few of them will choose a caesarean birth unless there are clear health reasons.

“However, our services fail women badly at the moment, with midwifery numbers well below the level required to guarantee safe and satisfying care.”

She went on: “If caesarean rates go up following the change to the guidelines, it will be evidence that women are not getting the quality of midwifery support they need.”

The guidelines do recommend that a woman requesting a caesarean should be made to talk about her fear of childbirth before an operation is granted.

From: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/Caesareans-to-be-offered-to-all-amid-fears-over-midwife-shortages

Meanwhile in other parts of the country married couples are being denied help in starting a family, forcing them to spend thousands of pounds on private treatment.

It comes after a Labour nanny state law removed the requirement for fertility doctors to consider a child’s need to have a male role model before going ahead with IVF.

Critics say the Government, which David Cameron promised would be “the most family friendly we’ve ever had in this country”, should tackle the postcode lottery of IVF provision and ensure that the needs of children are put first.

Frank Field, the Labour MP who carried out a high-profile review into poverty and life chances last year, said: “It’s clearly wrong that while couples in stable relationships can’t get IVF and in other areas, single women can.

“It’s really important that Government ministers speak up for children who are the ones left out of this. It needs someone in a position of authority to reflect what most taxpayers think.”

The Rt Rev Michael Nazir-Ali, the former Bishop of Rochester who once chaired the ethics committee of Britain’s fertility watchdog, said: “The irony is that at the very time research is showing the need for both parents, we are writing fathers out of the legislation.

“It’s one thing for a mother to find herself a single parent because of tragic circumstances. It’s quite another to plan for a situation where the child comes into the world without having a father or any possibility of having a father.”

Most local health authorities stipulate that couples must have been in a relationship for two or three years to qualify for IVF treatment.

That requirement is based on guidance issued in 2004 by the National Institute for Curbing Expenditure (Nice), the NHS rationing body,.

It states: “Couples in which the woman is aged 23–39 years at the time of treatment and who have an identified cause for their fertility problems … or who have infertility of at least three years’ duration, should be offered up to three stimulated cycles of in vitro fertilisation treatment.”

The document does note that the guidelines do not address social criteria “for example, whether it is single women or same-sex couples who are seeking treatment”.

However the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 removed the reference to “the need for a father” when considering the welfare of the child when considering fertility treatment, replacing it with “the need for supportive parenting”.

Gareth Johnson MP, who chairs the All Party Parliamentary Group on Infertility, said that trusts offering the service to single women were going against one of the guiding principles of IVF, “that you are treating an infertile couple, not an infertile individual”.

Mr Johnson, the Conservative MP for Dartford, said: “Speaking in a personal capacity, if you are going for IVF, you are trying to create a baby, so there should be some evidence of a stable background, which you would expect to be a couple.”

Earlier this year he led an APPG report that found startling differences between what health authorities offered in terms of IVF.

It found three-quarters of Primary Care Trusts were failing to offer three cycles of IVF, as stipulated by Nice. Each cycle comprises a woman’s ovaries being stimulated to produce eggs, which are then fertilised in vitro and implanted in the womb. Spare eggs should be frozen for use if the first attempt fails.

The report found five trusts offered no IVF at all – Warrington, West Sussex, Stockport, North Staffordshire and North Yorkshire and York. Since then, NHS West Sussex has decided to start funding IVF again.

Many trusts have also started putting in place further barriers to IVF funding – for example demanding obese women lose weight – in part to limit demand as health budgets tighten.

Against a background of increasingly scarce provision, as the NHS tries to save £20billion by 2015, Mr Johnson said the decision to offer IVF to single women was misplaced.

From: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/Single-women-being-offered-IVF-on-the-NHS

The study of babies at Chelsea and Westminster Hospital, west London, used magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans to investigate links between childhood obesity and their mothers.

It reportedly found evidence that being overweight or obese in pregnancy could result in potentially harmful changes to a baby’s fat levels while still in the womb.

The study, led by Prof Neena Modi, one of Britain’s best experts on high-risk health problems in newborns found nearly a third of children had more fat than expected.

Of the 105 babies – 54 boys and 51 girls – a total of 31 babies had more adpose, or fat, tissue around their abdomen than normal.

Experts said the study was the first direct link that proved the weight of a mother-to-be was passed on to her child and showed that overweight mothers gave birth to fat babies.

“I was very surprised to be able to detect such a clear continuum of effect of maternal BMI (body mass index) on the baby,” said Prof Modi, head of neonatal medicine at Imperial College London.

“This is a very important finding indeed, opening the door to a new understanding of how a mother’s metabolism affects her baby.”

Newborn babies usually have about 700g of adipose tissue, but for each unit increase in maternal BMI, this increased by approximately 7g with a huge build-up in fat in the babies’ livers.

Meanwhile in adults, adipose tissue is found mainly under the skin, but also in deposits between the muscles, around the intestines and around the heart.

Prof Modi, who is also a consultant neonatologist at Chelsea and Westminster Hospital, told the Daily Mail that all women should be aware of the effects of being obese and what this means for their child.

“This shows how sensitive the baby is to the environment experienced within the womb and how lifelong effects may be initiated before birth,” she said.

Body mass index is calculated by dividing a person’s weight in kilograms by the square of their height in metres.

The World Health Organisation classes a BMI between 18.5 and 25 as normal weight, between 25 and 30 as overweight and over 30 as obese.

In adults, high amounts of fat around the stomach and in the liver impair their control of blood sugar, leading to diabetes. Problems associated with obesity are set to cost the NHS up to £6.3 billion a year by 2015.

From: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/Overweight-mothers-give-birth-to-fat-babies-study-finds

In a blow to the nanny state’s view of fatherdom, new research has found that there is a biological reason why so many men suddenly discover their caring side when they become fathers.

The more caring side of a man’s character emerged as levels of the hormones fell, said scientists, who believe that the process is nature’s way of trying to ensure that fathers stay for the long  haul of child–rearing.

They found that men with higher testosterone levels – associated with dominant and aggressive behaviour – were both more likely to secure a partner and father children.

But after the birth itself  testosterone levels in these men dropped.

“Humans are unusual among mammals in that our offspring are dependent upon older individuals for feeding and protection for more than a decade,” said Christopher Kuzawa, a faculty fellow at the  Institute for Policy Research at Northwestern University in Chicago, and a coauthor of the study, published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. “Raising human offspring  is such an effort that it is cooperative by necessity, and our study shows that human fathers are biologically wired to help with the job.”

Lee Gettler, an anthropology doctoral student who also worked on the study, added: “It’s not the case that men with lower testosterone are simply more likely to become fathers.  On the contrary, the men who started with high testosterone were more likely to become fathers, but once they did, their testosterone went down substantially.”

It was the act of child care that seemed to reduce testosterone, he explained.

“Our findings suggest that this is especially true for fathers who become the most involved with child care.”

The biggest effect appears to be temporary, in the period immediately after bringing home the baby, with levels rising slowly after that, although not returning to pre–fatherhood levels.

The team studied 624 men in their twenties in the Philippines and followed them for four–and–a–half years. Dr Allan Pacey, a male sexual health expert at Sheffield University, commented: “To see  dramatic changes in response to family life is intriguing. The observations could make some evolutionary sense if we accept the idea that men with lower testosterone levels are more likely to be monogamous with their partner and care for children.

“However, it would be important to check that link between testosterone levels and behaviour to be certain.”

The study found that testosterone levels fell on average by 34 per cent when men became fathers, with the biggest falls in those most involved in childcare.

Dr Pacey added that, as high levels of testosterone were also associated with a strong sex drive, lower levels could reduce the chances of a man ‘straying’. However, he cautioned that the paper did  not prove that.

He added: ‘Testosterone is the key hormone that defines male physiology. We know that levels correlate with a man’s sex drive, his risk–taking behaviour and social dominance. It has also been suggested that it may increase his attractiveness to women and help him find a mate.”

From: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/Men-biologically-wired-to-care-for-children

This “peer effect”, as Bristol University researchers called it, raised the chances of becoming a teenage mother from about one in five to two in five.

The effect was stronger when sisters were closer together in age, while it was also stronger in poorer households.

Being educated to a higher level decreased its effect, but the research found that the sibling effect “dwarfs” that of more years in school.

Professor Carol Propper said: “Previous research has shown that family background and raising the education of girls decreases the chances of teenage pregnancy.

“However, these findings reveal the positive sibling effect still dwarfs the negative effect of education. These findings provide strong evidence that the contagious effect of teen motherhood in siblings is larger than the general effect of being better educated.

“This suggests that more policies aimed directly at decreasing teenage pregnancy may be needed in order to reduce teen births.”

The analysis was based on census data from 42,000 Norwegian women born after the Second World War. Most gave birth in the 1970s and 1980s.

The study, a collaboration with academics at Bergen University in Norway, the Norwegian School of Economics and Imperial College London, has been published as a working paper by Bristol University’s Centre for Market and Public Organisation.

From: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/Teenage-pregnancies-contagious

A nationwide lottery offering couples the chance to win IVF fertility treatment was strongly criticised.

The lottery is being organised by the charity To Hatch, founded by Camille Strachan, 38, to help people who are struggling to conceive. The winner of the lottery, which is licensed by the UK Gambling Commission, will be randomly selected by a computer in September. Further monthly draws are then planned.

Ms Strachan says she hoped the lottery “can ease the burden on the NHS and reduce the stress on some of those who are struggling.”

It is understood that a number of UK clinics have refused to participate, sparking rumours that a clinic in Barbados would be one of the destinations. Ms Strachan has declined to reveal which “top” clinics would offer the treatment.

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) have criticised the move as “wrong and entirely inappropriate”. They described it as running “counter to the ethos that underpins our regulatory system and clinical practice”.

Dr Allan Pacey, a fertility expert at the University of Sheffield and a spokesperson for the British Fertility Society, said: “In my view it’s a slippery slope to be dishing out healthcare like this, particularly when it comes to children. My mother and father used to say they found me under a gooseberry bush – can you imagine telling a child that he or she was won in a raffle?

“Ethics aside, I think it is precisely the current postcode lottery of NHS funding which makes this charity think it can make this venture a success. Couples either find they can’t get access to NHS treatment or they get only a single attempt and therefore need to fund any further treatment privately if that is unsuccessful.”

Despite criticism of the charity, public responses on internet chat forums were mixed. Although the majority expressed misgivings, hundreds of people indicated on Facebook and Twitter that they intended to buy tickets.

Many took the view that the lottery is a good idea, given what is widely perceived as a cut in the provision of IVF treatment on the NHS.

A spokesman for the Gambling Commission, which regulates lotteries, said: “The commission plays no statutory role in judging ethical questions that fall outside of the Gambling Act 2005. A licence is granted if all the criteria are met.”

From: http://www.independent.co.uk/fertility-doctors-attack-unethical-16320-ivf-raffle

The National Childbirth Trust welcomed the report but says the proposals do not go far enough.

NHS managers said maternity care desperately needed to be reorganised.

Too many babies are born in traditional hospital units, says the college, which also warns the current system is neither acceptable nor sustainable in its report on maternity care.

The college estimates there are about 1,000 too few consultants to provide adequate round-the-clock cover for hospital units.

Dr Falconer said: “There is no doubt if you look at the worst scenario of serious complications, you need the right person, a senior person, there immediately.”

Previous attempts to re-organise maternity care around a smaller number of hospital units have proved controversial, but Dr Falconer said if women could be convinced of the greater safety they would be prepared to travel to have their babies.

The need for change would be largely in cities or large towns, because in rural areas it might be more important to support smaller units.

The report estimates that across the UK there are 56 units with fewer than 2,500 deliveries of babies a year.

In order to take the pressure off busy hospitals, the college is also calling for an increase in the number of midwife-led units.

Midwives have welcomed the report, saying it could improve the experience for about a third of women who have straightforward deliveries.

The proposals for maternity are part of a wider vision of delivering all women’s gynaecology and obstetrics care in networks, similar to the model which has helped improve cancer treatments in England.

The National Childbirth Trust said the idea of having a network to provide joined-up care for women was one it could support but it would prefer care during pregnancy and maternity to be concentrated in one NHS organisation in each area.

The NHS confederation, which speaks for managers, described maternity care as a classic example of a service which desperately needed to be reorganised.

Chief executive Mike Farrar said politicians needed to be prepared to speak up for change.

“Where the case for change is clear, politicians should stand shoulder-to-shoulder with managers and clinicians to provide confidence to their constituents that quality and care will improve as a consequence of this change.”

Although Scotland has reorganised some of its maternity services, there are likely to be pressures for change elsewhere in the UK.

In North Wales maternity care across three hospitals is expected to change after an initial review recently concluded improvement was needed.

From: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-14145862

He told the annual meeting of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) in Stockholm: “It is important that people who believe that a smaller baby means an easier birth take into account the increased risk of complicated deliveries in smokers, as well as the risk of disease later in life which goes with low birth weight.”

“Smoking during pregnancy is not just bad for the mother and baby, but for the adult it ill grow into.”

He and a team at the university’s department of obstetrics and gynaecology have now produced what he called the first “hard evidence” that women who stopped smoking upon discovery they were pregnant, could protect their unborn children from harm.

The study looked at over 50,000 pregnancies in the Southampton area, analysing the birth weight of the babies and comparing this to self-reported smoking behaviour.

Those who continued to smoke through pregnancy had lower weight babies.

The more women smoked the lighter their babies were: those who smoked more than 10 a day had babies weighing some 11oz (300g) less than the average birth weight from a non-smoking mother, of about 7lb 10oz (3.45kg).

However, those who ceased smoking at about the time they conceived were just as likely to give birth to a normal weight baby as those who had never smoked.

He said: “We can now give couples hard evidence that making the effort to stop smoking in the periconceptional will be beneficial for their baby.

“Stopping smoking can ameliorate these detrimental effects.”

This could help change behaviour among smoking mothers, which he said had hardly changed in Britain over the last decade.

Prof Macklon explained that smoking during pregnancy “affects the transportation of nutrients, especially oxygen, across the placenta”.

It was also “reasonable to assume” that some of the 4,000 or so toxins in cigarettes were harmful to foetuses.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/8623267/Mothers-to-be-smoking-for-smaller-babies.html

“In October, when GPs started telling patients to come for immunisation, some pregnant women got it and some didn’t. GPs sent some of them away because they thought they didn’t need it, because no one had told them that pregnant women had been added to the list of groups of people considered ‘at risk’,” she said.

Research shows pregnant women are four times more likely to develop serious complications if they catch H1N1 swine flu, which is the main strain of seasonal flu circulating this winter. There has been concern that takeup of the jab protecting against all three strains of flu has been low among pregnant women.

Silverton also criticised the decision by the health secretary, Andrew Lansley, to cancel the usual advertising campaign intended to prompt the 16 million Britons classed as vulnerable to have the jab.

“It was short-sighted of the Department of Health not to have the usual campaign, she said. “It was done to save money. I agree with the government’s overall aim of reducing government advertising, but they should have been more selective and kept the campaign for all at-risk groups.

“Usually there are posters on buses and all sorts, but this year there was nothing. It was a wasted opportunity not to have the awareness campaign stressing the importance of people in at-risk groups being vaccinated.”

A majority of the 50 people to die from flu so far this winter had not had the three-in-one jab at least two weeks before falling ill, the Health Protection Agency said.

The outbreak has so far claimed 50 lives and left 783 people in intensive care, amid vaccine shortages and low takeup rates of the seasonal flu jab.

From:  http://www.guardian.co.uk/pregnant-women-flu-jabs-midwives

The HFEA was one of 192 quangos listed for abolition in October as one of the coalition’s flagship money saving initiatives.

Its office does not have the aura of a body that has been freshly culled. Staff are preparing for a general meeting in Cardiff, where the 2011-12 business plan will be agreed. Inspectors are reviewing recent inspections of IVF clinics. Employees are still pinning crayoned pictures by their children above their workstations and watering the plants.

A parliamentary committee’s withering conclusion last week that the government “botched” its mission to “reduce the number and cost of quangos” is met with no surprise by staff here, who remain bemused by the decision to close down their organisation.

News of the HFEA’s planned closure, and distribution of its functions to other organisations, has been greeted with dismay by doctors and research scientists, who warn that it threatens the government’s ability to make sound decisions about crucial ethical issues.

Of all the dull-sounding, bureaucratic bodies crossed out in a pen stroke last October, the HFEA has the least arcane function. Responsible for inspecting and regulating IVF clinics, it also deliberates on the ethical boundaries of creating life and using embryos for research, a sector that is developing with rapacious speed.

Anyone planning to undergo fertility treatment in the UK depends on the HFEA to ensure that clinics are safe. Children who have been born as a result of donated sperm or eggs may want to turn to the organisation to discover information about the donor.

Practitioners rely on the body to help set out moral guidelines: is it ethical (to give one example under consideration at the moment) to allow a woman to use frozen embryos left to her by her grandmother, which would result in her giving birth to her own aunt or uncle?

The HFEA’s chair, Professor Lisa Jardine, the high-profile and outspoken academic, has reined in any personal impulse towards protest or defiance, and is mounting a delicate campaign to ensure that the organisation can be preserved.

She insists that her job is to comply with what the government has ruled, but makes it clear that she will be working to promote an alternative, which would see the HFEA continue broadly unchanged, swept into the folds of another government-run organisation.

“It’s the most controversial area of medicine, apart from assisted dying. It’s the most morally difficult area, it’s the most carefully legislated-for area, and the most tightly regulated area. I’m totally committed to doing this job of regulating assisted reproduction, above all IVF and research on embryonic tissue,” she says. “My only aim is to keep doing that until someone else can do it properly.”

She believes the HFEA was included on the list of quangos to be abolished by accident. “I feel very passionately that this is a mistake,” she says, stressing that no steps have been made towards closure. “We’re nowhere near. We haven’t even started.”

Provisional Department of Health plans indicate that the HFEA’s functions are to be transferred and split between other DH bodies. None of the 79 staff members know whether they will keep their job when the quango is wound down, nor when that might happen. Employees, from computer technicians to policy experts, seem united in their loyalty to the organisation, and voice anxiety not only for their own job security, but for the ability of a restructured HFEA to perform the range of services it was created to provide. The staff are civil servants, not inclined towards intemperate expressions of outrage. Instead, their laments cautiously warn that the proposed course of action may prove to have been ill-advised.

In a side room in the quiet central London office, Peter Thompson, the HFEA’s director of strategy, says staff had not expected the body to be scrapped, because as recently as 2008 parliament had debated its role and there had been “almost no voices at all saying this organisation ought to be abolished”.

He says: “Having had that endorsement in 2008, from all sides of parliament, to have this decision only two years later did come as a bit of a shock”

At the last authority meeting the governing body agreed it was a “very difficult” process for staff and “asked that efforts were made to minimise their stress”. Someone has cut a slit out of an empty cardboard box, and stuck a label on it marked “Worry Box”, inviting colleagues to post their concerns.

“My job as one of the senior people here is to lead and manage people through that uncertainty. Keeping our focus on doing the job well, maintaining morale, keeping people’s spirits up,” Thompson says.

The bonfire of the quangos appeared to herald a straightforward, hard-nosed money-saving exercise. The reality is much messier. Only a few bodies are to be closed outright. The others will have their functions transferred to new bodies, at some uncertain point in the future.

Cabinet Office minister Francis Maude insisted last week that the axing would save “significantly more” than £1bn. However, the public administration select committee warns that the “current approach is not going to make significant cost savings or result in greater accountability”.

Ian Magee, a senior fellow at the Institute for Government (IFG), and co-author of Read Before Burning, a report into the closure of the quangos published last year, says that unless the functions performed by the organisations are also abolished, very little money will be saved.

“It’s not going to contribute much to the budget deficit reduction,” he says. Closing down quangos is a complex process, he adds. “You can’t just turn the tap straight off.”

Maude is confident that the correct decisions have been made. “We think the process has gone pretty well. All three parties fought the election with a commitment to reducing significantly the number of quangos. There is a uniform view across the political spectrum of the desirability of doing so,” he says.

On the decision to wind down the HFEA, he adds: “You have a very complicated landscape of health regulatory bodies. The view taken by the health minister was that there is scope for simplifying that operation and making it a much more efficient and streamlined operation.”

The government has said that the HFEA will continue working “for the time being”, but that its functions will be transferred by the end of the current parliament. Government officials are examining the “practicalities (and legal implications) of how to divide the HFEA’s functions between a new research regulator, the Care Quality Commission and the Health and Social Care Information Centre”.

But the announcement was so confused when it was made that many people – staff included – thought the closure would be immediate. On the HFEA’s website a notice states prominently: “You may have seen reports in the press that the HFEA ‘has been abolished’. This is not so.”

The notice points out that the government cannot scrap the HFEA without first introducing new legislation.

“At the moment, we have no – literally zero – idea of what the Department of Health plan is,” Jardine says.

With such a delayed death knell, staff were uncertain whether to be devastated or sanguine at the news. Paula Robinson, head of business planning, says: “The time frame was so long, I can’t say it really rocked my world. It’s not brilliant to hear that an organisation is going to be abolished, but if you hear that it is going to be a matter of years, it eases the pain. I am not sitting here wringing my hands. I am a change-friendly person.”

But one of the inspectors, who carries out regulatory checks on IVF clinics, was aghast. “I felt very worried. I have just bought my first house. My husband works for the NHS. Two jobs that are very uncertain,” she says.

In a proposal aimed at streamlining the bodies regulating medical research, the Academy of Medical Sciences today suggests that the HFEA’s research and ethical functions should be transferred to a new Health Research Agency. But any move towards splitting up its responsibilities is not welcomed by employees.

“I think that the decision ignored the fact that because all our functions are together in one body, that enables us to be a more intelligent, more efficient regulator,” Thompson says. “This body has dedicated people who know what they are doing. These are people who care about the sector they regulate and the patients. I think by having all of those functions in one place, we do a more efficient and intelligent job than by scattering those functions to other places.”

Policy manager Helen Richens leads a campaign to reduce the number of multiple births from IVF clinics. Historically, she says, doctors would transfer multiple embryos, but the health risks to the mother and the embryos were very high. Now, if the woman is under 40, doctors can transfer no more than two embryos; over 40, no more than three. The HFEA has imposed a 20% maximum multiple births target on each of the country’s 138 clinics, enforced with the threat of losing a licence.

“One of the reasons we are good at this is that we have the policy staff and inspectors, who are going and seeing what is happening; we hold all the data on all the fertility treatment in the UK, we can analyse it and monitor it, so when we make policy it is proper, evidence-based policy,” she says. “We will be moving from a world-leading model to something that is a less than gold-standard regulatory model.”

She adds: “I think I feel maybe a bit unappreciated. You do your job well, other countries look towards us … there is a collective feeling, what is the point of moving us on, breaking us up? It is not going to save money. If there isn’t a measurable benefit, what is the point of getting rid of this quango?”

The HFEA has an annual budget of £7m, only £2m of which is provided by the government; the remaining £5m is funded by the clinics, which pay to be regulated. The body charges clinics, both private and NHS, £104 for an IVF cycle and £52 for donor insemination.

Jardine, who has just been reappointed for a three-year term, hopes to be able to trim the amount needed from the government to around £1m. “There will be additional expenditure. There will certainly be no saving,” she says of the planned abolition. “We are incredibly cheap.”

Collectively, the senior management have taken a clear decision not to campaign noisily against closure. They point to the unsuccessful campaign mounted to save the UK Film Council, whose demise was announced at the same time. Despite the appointment of a PR adviser and the involvement of director Steven Spielberg, the abolition went ahead.

Instead, they set out the value of their work.

“Any couple can walk into any clinic in the British Isles and know that their IVF or other reproductive treatment has been fiercely vetted and that they will come to no harm. No person walking into a plastic surgery clinic has that assurance,” Jardine says.

Supporters of the decision argue that as IVF has become much more common in the 20 years since the HFEA has been operating, there is less need to regulate it so closely. Jardine disagrees.

“IVF is not routine. There are people out there who still think that we shouldn’t be doing any of what we are doing. Some of them have seats in the House of Lords.”

The issues are too ethically and politically explosive to be dealt with by politicians, she argues. “There are too many pressures on parliament, and civil servants are not trained to deal with those kinds of issues. I believe that these morally fraught issues must be held at arm’s length from government.”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/jan/10/battle-life-ivf-regulator-hfea

The NHS has received more than 1,000 complaints about Implanon, a device that had been hailed as the future of family planning.

The procedure involves injecting a plastic implant under a woman’s skin, which releases the “pill” hormone progesterone, guarding against pregnancy for up to three years.

The procedure is regularly given to under-16s who are not deemed responsible enough to remember to take oral contraceptives on a daily basis.

Figures obtained by Channel 4 News show that 584 women who had the hormone-filled tube inserted into their arms have reported unwanted pregnancies to the Medicines and Healthcare Regulatory Agency.

There have been a total of 1,607 complaints about scarring and other problems associated with the device, the majority made by doctors and nurses who claimed it was difficult to insert properly and could not be checked afterwards. In the most serious cases, NHS Trusts have offered settlements to seven women totalling nearly £200,000.

Some women who took Implanon terminated pregnancies and suffered the breakdown of relationships.

One woman, named as Lara, said her marriage collapsed due to the stress. “I don’t want kids at this time. It really disturbed me,” she said.

MSD, which manufactured the implant, said it was replacing Implanon with a new contractive implant named Nexplanon.

In a statement, it added that the active ingredient would remain the same but, unlike Implanon, the new implant would show up on X-rays and CAT scans. The applicator has been modified, the company said.

It added that a training programme was available for health professionals involved in fitting the devices.

Family planning clinics in England have reported rapidly increased use of contraceptive implants, from 16,000 women in 2005 to nearly 82,000 in 2010. Implanon, which cost £90 per treatment, was more than 99 per cent effective.

A spokesman for the MHRA said: “The reports we received from health care professionals and consumers played a strong role in the update of the device.”

From: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/Women-win-200000-payout-over-pill-implant-pregnancies

This may be due to women recognising that they are pregnant later but also reflects on how well organised services are.

The figures show that almost nine in ten women were seen in the first 12 weeks at the Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust compared with less than one in ten at Walshall Hospitals NHS Trust in 2009/10.

Similarly more than three in ten women had a caesarean birth at Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, in London – twice as many as at Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust in Shropshire.

However the variations cannot be completely explained by deprivation as neighbouring hospitals will had large differences in rates.

At Rotherham NHS Foundation Trust 87.6 per cent were seen in the first 12 weeks, five times higher than in neighbouring Barnsley Hospital NHS Trust where 17.2 per cent were seen.

There were twice as many caesareans at Hereford Hospitals NHS Trust than at nearby Shrewsbury and Telford.

Nationally more women are being seen within the first 12 weeks in 2009/10 compared with the previous year and the caesaearan section rate has remained for the last year at around one in four of all births, the majority of which were conducted as emergencies.

The figures show that the proportion of births delivered by doctors instead of midwives has increased from less than one in four in 1989/90 to almost four in ten in 2009/10, as a result of more caesarean and instrument deliveries due to greater numbers of older and obese mothers giving birth.

Tim Straughan, Chief executive of The NHS Information Centre, said: “The figures show that the experience women have of NHS maternity care varies markedly across the country and even within regions.

“Rates of caesareans and access to antenatal assessment in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy vary according to which hospital they use.

“In some trusts, there may be specific demographic or clinical reasons that explain why they carry out, for example, more caesareans. But others will need to examine closely the full range of reasons why their rate is different from the national average of about one caesarean delivery for every four deliveries.”

Cathy Warwick, General Secretary of the Royal College of Midwives (RCM), said: “These results show that there is a postcode lottery when it comes to maternity services, and this is worrying when those services are part of a ‘national’ health service. Women should expect and receive high quality care wherever they live, not care that is based upon chance and plain old good luck.

“Superficially the huge variations revealed in this report are a concern and further analysis is needed to find out why they are occurring.

“The variation on the first antenatal booking is astonishing and those on caesarean section rates – already widely known – are worrying in their persistence at such a level.

“Midwives are the experts when it comes to normal births and will deliver the vast majority of women having their baby in this way. The fact that midwives’ involvement in birth has decreased will be reflected in the increase in caesarean rates and instrumental deliveries over the years.

“I think some of the large variations could be linked to staffing levels; as we know one-to-one care from a midwife increases the possibility of a normal delivery but I am sure this is not the whole story. It could also be related to how services are organised.

“In the statistics around intervention, maternity units need to be looking at each other’s practice to see where they can learn from each other, and make their services better for women and their babies.”

From: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/Maternity-postcode-lottery-revealed-in-NHS-figures

It says mothers and babies will suffer unless the 3,000 extra midwives it says were promised are delivered by 2014.

RCM general secretary Cathy Warwick told its annual conference there are too few to cope with a rising birth rate and increasingly complex births.

The Tories said the rise was now not needed as the birth rate was stable.

She said: “Just before the election, both the prime minister and the deputy prime minister told us that they would commit to continuing the previous government’s promise to give us more midwives.

“We’ve just done a survey of all the heads of midwifery and they’ve got vacant posts but they’re having difficulty filling them.”

The RCM survey of 83 out of 194 heads of midwifery suggested maternity units were already seeing budget and staffing cuts.

Some 30% said their budgets had fallen over the past year, while a third had been asked to reduce staff.

And two-thirds surveyed said they did not have enough midwives to cope with demand.

Meanwhile, the number of live births in England has risen by 19% between 2001 and 2009, to 670,000 a year.

The RCM said births over the same period had become more complex, with obese pregnant women and older or teenage women needing extra support.

The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) said maternity services were facing many challenges.

President, Dr Tony Falconer, said: “As well as need for more midwives, there is a need for more consultants to deal with the increase in the number of high-risk pregnancies.”

A Conservative Party spokesman said: “The commitment to 3,000 midwives made in opposition was dependent on the birthrate increasing as it has done in the recent past. It was not in the coalition agreement because predictions now suggest the birthrate will be stable over the next few years.

“People can be absolutely clear that our commitment to meet the needs of expectant mothers remains, and we will continue to train new midwives to meet the demands arising from the births.”

From: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-11772485

The charity’s poll of more than 1,200 first time mothers found 59 per cent did not get the “emotional support” they felt they needed after giving birth – compared with 51 per cent in a similar survey a decade ago.

Women who had undergone a caesarean section were the least happy about their experience.

Asked about the 24 hours following birth, 66 per cent said they had not received enough support, compared to 57 per cent of those who had a natural labour in hospital, and 24 per cent of those who gave birth at home.

Mothers who had gone through traumatic labours said they had been left to cry themselves to sleep, while others said overstretched midwives had no time to offer a kind word of reassurance.

In total, 42 per cent said there were not enough midwives to care for them, compared with 33 per cent, when the question was posed in 2000.

Those who gave birth at home, or in a midwife-led birth centre, were less likely to describe shortages of midwives.

The NCT findings show that despite a large investment in maternity services, and pledges from the last Government to make care “woman-centred” with a choice of where to give birth, many women are being denied even basic care.

Among the poll of 1260 first time mothers, 44 per cent said they did not even get the physical help they needed, while 55 per cent said they did not get enough information or advice in the weeks after having their first child.

Anne Fox, the head of campaigns and public policy for the NCT, said; “It’s clear postnatal care urgently needs improvement – our report paints a dreadful, shocking picture of care in the UK – we’re letting women and their babies down.

“Many of the problems these women highlight seem to be due to staff shortages or lack of visits once they had left hospital – and this issue needs to be addressed if the quality of postnatal care is to be improved, particularly for vulnerable women.

In the report, new mothers describe being “absolutely terrified” and alone during their first night in hospital, frightened to ask for help from staff who responded to them rudely.

One mother said: “As soon as the baby was born, I felt I was on my own. I spent the first night after the birth of my son in floods of tears and unable to sleep as every time I closed my eyes the nightmare of my birth experience came flooding back.

“Nobody came to check on me to see if I was OK, even though I know I was sobbing loudly and uncontrollably.”

Louise Silverton, Deputy General Secretary of the Royal College of Midwives, described the report’s findings as “disappointing,” but said the study sent a compelling message to those in charge of NHS budgets, about the need to keep investing in maternity services.

From: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/Midwives-have-no-time-to-care-for-new-mums-report-warns

When one of the women fell pregnant he arranged for a termination but failed to record the details in her medical records.

Dr Carr-Bains was suspended from medical practice for a year following a two week hearing at the General Medical Council (GMC).

But he was told he would have been struck off the medical register had it not been for 49 pages of testimonials from fellow doctors, patients and friends.

The GMC heard that Dr Carr-Bains began a sexual relationship with a woman identified as Patient A in December 1995 after she visited him at the Guildowns Group Practice in Guildford, Surrey, suffering from mental health problems.

When she fell pregnant in 1999, he arranged for her to have an immediate termination, but failed to make any record of the abortion.

The GMC hearing, which took place in Manchester, was also told that he failed to put a letter from the British Pregnancy Advisory Service in her medical file and did not refer her for post-termination counselling.

In June 2003 he began a relationship with another woman, known as Patient B, who told the GMC panel, they often slept together in her university accommodation.

Both women had been suffering from mental health problems.

Andrew Kennedy, representing Dr Carr-Bains said his relationship with Patient A was one of “deep love and friendship over a long period of time”.

He added that Dr Carr-Bains had otherwise had a “blameless career spanning 32-years with no clinical concerns and utter devotion to patients and the wider profession”.

But the GMC was told Dr Carr-Bains had “abused his position of trust” to “exploit vulnerable patients”.

The panel chaired by Dr Roger Ferguson, ruled in its findings that Dr Carr-Bains’ behaviour had been “wholly unacceptable” and that he had shown a “flagrant disregard” for the doctor patient relationship.

The report read: “You exercised poor judgement in engaging in a sexual relationship with two patients registered at your practice. To this end, the Panel concluded that you have failed to maintain appropriate professional boundaries and differentiate between the importance of your role as a GP and personal relationships.”

The report added: “Your actions have shown a flagrant disregard for the importance of the doctor-patient relationship.”

But Dr Carr-Bains avoided being struck off the medical register after a large number of testimonials were submitted describing him as a “highly competent, conscientious, hard working and respected doctor”, who was “caring” and “kind”.

The GMC panel stated that his case would be reviewed shortly before the period of suspension expired.

Dr Carr-Bains became Student Medical Officer at the University of Surrey in 1999 before resigning from his post at the Guildowns Group Practice in 2006.

A spokesman for the university said the college was “dismayed” at the “breach of trust”.

The spokesman said: “Dr Stephen Carr-Bains was employed by the GP practice that supplied services to the university and our students.

“We are dismayed by Mr Carr-Bains clear breach of trust and welcome the GMC’s ruling on the case which reflects our own determination to protect and treat student patients with respect at all times, affording their safety the highest level of priority.”

From: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/Doctor-suspended-after-getting-patient-pregnant

Writing in the Observer, Field, chairman of the Royal College of General Practitioners, backs the controversial call by Andrew Lansley, the health secretary, for Britons to take more responsibility for protecting their health.

“The truth is that too many of us neglect our health, and this is leading to increasing levels of illness and early death,” Field writes. Soaring levels of diabetes, much of it caused by obesity, and the medical consequences of heavy drinking, which are affecting ever-younger people, illustrate this widespread failure, he adds.

Discussion of the harmful medical consequences of ill-advised personal behaviour is curtailed because of its sensitivity, Field argues.

“Too many people do not face up to the hard facts, as they perceive them to be an attack aimed, in particular, at the poorer members of society. But it is impossible to argue on medical or ethical grounds that such behaviour is acceptable.”

While arguing for health prevention to become an individual duty and start at home, Field makes it clear that he does not want people to be left to make lifestyle changes on their own or to see personal responsibility as a total solution. Those who seek to alter their behaviour need continuing NHS and government help, he adds.

“So please don’t take offence if we [GPs] tell you to lose weight or stop smoking or drinking. You need to face facts and take responsibility. Support is out there and it could save your life – and save the NHS a fortune.”

Anne Milton, the public health minister, said greater personal responsibility was vital. Many senior doctors also agreed, but stressed that government action was needed to help create a climate in which people could swap healthy for unhealthy behaviour, such as by monitoring big food companies.

Lansley has alarmed senior doctors by saying the coalition will use much less regulation than Labour did to tackle problems such as obesity and smoking.

GPs seek to help people live healthy lives “but every day we are confronted by the harm caused by smoking, excessive alcohol consumption and the ‘tsunami’ of obesity”, adds Field, the leader of the country’s 40,000 GPs.

Irresponsible parents are damaging their children’s health by smoking around them, feeding them unhealthy food and failing to act as good role models, he says. Mothers and fathers who smoke in cars carrying their offspring – who Field says “are committing a form of child abuse” – and at home in front of their children kill more young people than do accidental injuries.

Parents who give their children unhealthy food, or serve them large portions are storing up huge problems for them, says Field. “Unless parents exert more control over their children’s diets, they are risking a lifetime of health problems, and even premature death – death before their parents, which is almost too sad to contemplate,” he adds.

Parents’ failure to safeguard their children from sunburn and using sunbeds can also lead to them developing skin cancer, he argues. Mothers who smoke while pregnant risk causing their child’s death through cot death syndrome, asthma, lung infections or house fires. Would-be mothers and women who are already expecting need to control their weight because maternal obesity can harm the mother or her baby.

Instead of becoming obese and then asking the NHS to provide liposuction or gastric bands, “it would be better if people didn’t become fat in the first place”, by eating better and exercising more.

Agreeing with Field, Milton said: “We need a new public health movement, owned by everyone, for everyone’s benefit. A movement that transforms the way in which the public’s health is improved, but also revolutionises the way we think about it. As Field points out, personal responsibility is a key part of this.”

However, Milton added: “The government recognises that it cannot force people into behaving in a certain way. But we can help people make informed decisions and ensure that they are enabled and supported to make healthy choices.”

Professor Terence Stephenson, president of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, agreed some parents let down their children. “Of course paediatricians agree that people should take responsibility for their own lives. But young children cannot do that. What they eat and the environment they live in are determined by their parents. There is a role for society to protect young children from promotion of unhealthy foods and passive smoking. Would all parents strap young children into a car seat if it was left to choice rather than law?”

He urged a twin-track approach of exhorting parents to care for children well but society also intervening to help by, for example, limiting advertising of unhealthy foods.

Dr John Middleton, vice-president of the UK Faculty of Public Health, said: “A significant amount of ill-health is due to people’s lack of personal responsibility. The NHS would have fewer burdens on it if people were more physically active, cut their alcohol consumption and ate a lower-fat, lower-sugar diet. The government and the NHS cannot do everything. But someone trying to give up smoking will find it easier if they get counselling and nicotine replacement therapy on the NHS, for instance.”

The government had a key role to play in promoting health, as shown by its crackdown on smoking and its fluoridisation of water supplies, said Professor Dinesh Bhugra, president of the Royal College of Psychiatrists. People who insisted on smoking despite all the warnings about it should retain their freedom to do so, he added.

But Tam Fry, National Obesity Forum spokesman, suggested Field was being naïve. “If Professor Field wants a world where everyone assumes personal responsibility, he is living a dream. He appears to have forgotten the 35-40% of our population who live in the same obesogenic environment as he does but simply can’t cope with it or have long since given up the unequal struggle. They are the people who are quite unequipped to resist the 24/24 battering of junk food promotion and are easy prey for the marketing men.”

However, “certainly the 40% of women entering pregnancy either overweight or obese do so simply because they have never had role model lessons in parenting from either their own mothers or health professionals”, Fry added.

From: http://www.guardian.co.uk/public-health-attitudes-leading-gp

Although family doctors frequently know a woman’s medical history best, their role in pregnancy care has become sidelined in recent decades, found the authors of the report, The role of GPs in maternity care – what does the future hold?

The King’s Fund concluded that GPs’ role in maternity care had “all but disappeared over the past 30 years, with recent policy and guidance omitting any reference to their role in caring for pregnant women”.

“Under the terms of the new GP contract introduced in 2004, GPs are no longer paid for each pregnant woman they look after,” it noted.

“In addition, many GPs have opted out of providing out-of-hours care, resulting in sick pregnant women going to A&E with pregnancy-related problems – or simply not knowing what to do if they are ill.”

Nick Goodwin, director of the Fund’s GP Inquiry, said such care was increasingly dealt with by specialists, which had led to a less connected service for pregnant women.

He said: “As a result of that you get reports that some mothers feel a bit abandoned at the beginning of their pregnancy. Who is looking after them?”

Sometimes pregnant women’s other health needs – like mental health issues and obesity – were not being dealt with, he said.

“More needs to be done to make sure that the whole person is treated.”

The report proposed that GPs should now take “a more active role”.

Anna Dixon, lead author of the report and director of policy at The King’s Fund, said: “It is right that those with specialist skills, such as midwives and obstetricians, take the lead role in caring for pregnant women but GPs have a vital role to play in pre-conception and shared ante-natal and post-natal care.”

The report has been widely welcomed by GPs’ groups.

Dr Laurence Buckman, chairman of the BMA’s GPs Committee, said: “GPs want to be more involved in maternity care because they see it as an important part of their job.”

Prof Steve Field, chairman of the Royal College of General Practitioners, welcomed the “timely” report, saying it made “a very compelling case for GPs to play a more central role”.

However, Belinda Phipps chairman of the National Childbirth Trust, which campaigns for less medical intervention during pregnancy and birth, said it would be better to “actively promote midwife-led care to women”.

From http://www.telegraph.co.uk/Pregnant-women-feel-abandoned-by-NHS

It follows the publication of guidance by the nanny state’s National Institute for Curbing Expenditue (NICE)  that sex education should be introduced from the age of five.

Trevor Stammers, chairman of the Christian Medical Fellowship and a GP in south London, told The Sunday Times: “If sex education is introduced in primary schools in the way being proposed, we will see many more 11-year-old girls seeking contraception without pointing out the risks…. We are going to make matters worse.”

He added: “These figures illustrate the fact that the UK is facilitating the sexualisation of young people at an ever younger age.”

The latest figures came from the General Practice Research Database, which collects information on medical records from 500 GP practices.

The data also shows that at least 58,000 15-year-olds were on the pill last year – more than double the number in 1999.

By law, doctors are bound by a duty of confidentiality towards children – even if they are under the legal age of consent – unless they suspect abuse.

From: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/Huge-rise-in-11-year-olds-on-the-pill

The statistics are part of wider research on the experiences of 18-year-olds in England, published by the Department for Education.

The responses of thousands of 18-year-olds questioned for the Youth Cohort Study and the Longitudinal Study of Young People in England were analysed.

The findings show that of the 18-year-old girls questioned about pregnancy, 18 per cent had been pregnant at least once.

Of these, almost eight in 10 (79 per cent) had been expecting a baby on just one occasion, nearly one in five (18 per cent) had been pregnant twice, and 3 per cent had been pregnant at least three times.

The survey concluded there was a “noticeable trend” between the young women who fell pregnant by 18, and their GCSE results.

A third (33 per cent) of those who gained between one and four GCSEs at grades D-G had been pregnant at least once by the time they were 18, compared to just 6 per cent of those who scored eight or more GCSEs at Grades A*-C.

Teenage girls who were eligible for Free School Meals – a measure of poverty – at age 16, or who had parents who left school at 16, were also more likely to get pregnant by the age of 18, the figures showed.

According to figures published by the Office for National Statistics, there were 25.3 births for every 1,000 women under 20, in 2009.

Girls aged 15 to 19 accounted for 39,020 abortions carried out in England and Wales in 2009.

The figures show that 18 per cent of girls who said they were sexually active had been pregnant by the age of 18.

More than eight in ten (83 per cent) of the boys and girls questioned said they were sexually active by the time they turned 18.

From: http://www.independent.co.uk/a-fifth-of-girls-pregnant-by-18-survey-reveals-2032952

GPs say there is already a breakdown in communication with health visitors who work in the centres, and placing more there would make it worse.

But children’s charities say parents need a more informal approach.

Health visitors have usually worked out of GPs’ surgeries – but the growth of Sure Start children’s centres has seen more moving to them.

The children’s charity 4children says having health visitors based in these centres means there is less need for mothers to use GPs’ surgeries for non-urgent problems and advice.

The Royal College of GPs says its members are seeing a worrying pattern developing, where vital information is not being passed back to them.

It says GPs need to be more actively involved in the the care of mothers during and after their pregnancy, and health visitors have to link in more with GP practices.

Professor Steve Fields of the Royal College of GPs said: “Mums-to-be are not getting the service they could have had five or 10 years ago.

“It is an unintended consequence of children’s centres being established and health visitors moving out of GPs’ surgeries and GPs not being as actively involved the care of mums-to-be during their pregnancy.

From: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/10423346.stm

Overweight women are more than twice as likely to miscarry an IVF baby compared with those whose weight is healthier, fertility doctors say. The increased risk is so great they believe a warning should be included in counselling for couples before they embark on a course of fertility treatment.

Women who conceive naturally are known to have a greater chance of miscarrying if their body mass index (BMI) is 25 or higher, but the picture has been less clear for women carrying babies produced by in-vitro fertilisation (IVF), or another technique called intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI).

“Overweight women wishing to get pregnant by spontaneous conception are already counselled to lose weight before trying for a baby,” said Tarek El-Toukhy, a fertility specialist who led the study at the assisted conception unit of Guy’s and St Thomas’ Hospital in London.

“Our findings have shown clearly that women undertaking ART [assisted reproductive technology] should be strongly encouraged to heed this advice in order that they can have the best possible chance of obtaining and maintaining a pregnancy,” he added.

Overweight mothers have a higher risk of developing other medical conditions that can threaten their pregnancy, including high blood pressure, pre-eclampsia, diabetes, premature delivery and post-partum bleeding.

El-Toukhy’s team examined the medical records of 318 women who each had one embryo implanted during fertility treatment at the clinic between January 2006 and December 2009. The women were divided into two groups: 185 had a healthy BMI between 18.5 and 24.9, while 133 had a BMI of 25 or above. Of the latter group, 19 were obese, defined as having a BMI of 30 or more.

The study, reported today at a meeting of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology in Rome, found a miscarriage rate of 22% among women with a healthy BMI, compared with a 33% miscarriage rate for the overweight women.

After adjusting their data to take account of the women’s age, history of infertility and miscarriage, and lifestyle factors such as smoking, the researchers concluded that being overweight more than doubled the miscarriage rate.

“Although there is evidence that miscarriage rates are higher in overweight women who conceive spontaneously, there were conflicting views about the effect of increased weight on the outcome of pregnancies occurring after IVF and ICSI,” said Vivian Rittenberg, a fertility doctor who took part in the study.

Rittenberg said many studies that have examined the issue in the past have been hard to interpret, not least because doctors looked at miscarriage rates after implanting several embryos at once at different stages of development.

“We transferred only one embryo at a specific stage of development, and were therefore able to provide clear evidence of the deleterious effect of being overweight on the chances of miscarriage,” she said.

From: http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/jun/28/overweight-doubles-risk-miscarriage-ivf

The trend was clearest if the fasting was done early in the women’s pregnancy, and during the summer months, when long hours of daylight called for them to go longer without food.

Ramadan is the ninth month of the Islamic calendar and a time when Muslims across the world fast from dawn until sunset. Three in four Muslim pregnancies overlap with Ramadan and surveys indicate that the majority of pregnant Muslims observe the fast. This year, it falls between 11 August and 9 September.

Although pregnant women may request an exemption from fasting, they are expected to “make up” the fasting days missed during pregnancy after their baby is born.

Previous research has suggested that this requirement may discourage pregnant women from seeking the exemption, since they do not want to be the only member of their household fasting. Some Muslims also interpret Islamic law as requiring pregnant women in good health to fast.

Since fasting during Ramadan is one of the five pillars of Islam and is a central part of Muslim culture, many women may fear a loss of connection with their communities or would feel guilty if they did not observe Ramadan.

The study, which used census data from the US, Iraq and Uganda, also discovered long-term effects on the adult’s health and his or her future economic success.

Douglas Almond, of Columbia University, and Bhashkar Mazumder, of the Federal Research Bank of Chicago, the authors of the research, concluded: “We generally find the largest effects on adults when Ramadan falls early in pregnancy.

“Rates of adult disability are roughly 20 per cent higher, with specific mental disabilities showing substantially larger effects. Importantly, we detect no corresponding outcome differences when the same design is applied to non-Muslims.”

Sheikh Ibrahim Mogra, an imam from Leicester, said sharia (Islamic law) would never expect a woman to fast if it had an adverse effect on either the mother or child.

“Sharia would not want the mother to unnecessarily burden herself,” he said. “There’s no point being needlessly brave. When Ramadan falls during the winter months, more women will fast. But when it falls during the summer, when you might have to fast for 16 or 17 hours, it is understandable that fewer mothers will be fasting.”

From:
http://www.independent.co.uk/pregnant-women-who-fast-for-ramadan-risk-damage-to-their-babies-study-finds

Government data have disclosed that 89 girls aged 17 or under who terminated a pregnancy last year had had at least two abortions previously.

The head of Britain’s largest abortion provider said many young women were living chaotic lives that meant they could not organise contraception.

Christian doctors said the statistics demonstrated the failure of liberal sex education policies and nanny state edicts.

The Department of Health figures for 2009 show that, for the first time, more than a third (34 per cent) of abortions were performed on women who had already ended one or more pregnancies.

Across all ages, more than 1,000 women or girls were on at least their fifth termination, including 214 on their sixth, 70 on their seventh and 48 who underwent the procedure for at least the eighth time.

Ann Furedi, the chief executive of the British Pregnancy Advisory Service, said repeated pregnancies among teenage girls were often caused by chaotic lifestyles and difficulties they had in using contraception.

She said: “With teenage girls, often they feel able to handle sex, emotionally and physically, yet aren’t able to handle the planning that comes with contraception.”

Dr Peter Saunders, from the Christian Medical Fellowship, which represents Christian doctors, said that the figures were profoundly depressing. “It is increasingly clear that abortion is simply being used as a form of contraception by a growing percentage of girls and women, and that tired policies of values-free sex education, condoms and morning-after pills are not working,” he said.

The total number of abortions in England and Wales last year, 189,100, fell slightly on the previous year. Of those, 63,390 involved women who had previously ended a pregnancy, compared with 51,987 a decade ago — a rise of 22 per cent.

Almost 18,000 abortions were carried out on girls aged under 18, including more than 1,000 on girls aged 14 or under. The statistics follow controversy last month about Britain’s first television advertisement for abortion services.

From: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/Dozens-of-teenage-girls-have-had-three-abortions-or-more

“Selective reduction” abortions, when one foetus is removed to improve the survival chances of another in a multiple pregnancy, are also included.

The figures from the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, which regulates IVF clinics in the UK, were obtained as part of a Freedom of Information request.

They show that the proportion of foetuses aborted remained stable between 1991 and 2008, the last year for which data was available. In that year there were 65 terminations in 6,723 pregnancies.

The 18-34 age group saw the highest number of abortions, with 23 terminations, but they also had significantly more pregnancies than older IVF patients.

There was no information on the number of abortions of IVF pregnancies which had originally been funded by the NHS. Public provision of IVF is patchy, and many couples pay thousands of pounds to undergo fertility procedures privately.

Professor Bill Ledger, a member of the HFEA said: “I had no idea that there were so many post-IVF abortions and each one is a tragedy”, while former conservative MP Ann Widdecombe said some were treating babies like “designer goods”.

But Susan Seenan of the Infertility Network UK advised caution.

“Anyone who has undergone IVF knows what a long and difficult experience it can be. To make the decision to then terminate that pregnancy cannot be one that anyone takes lightly. I would imagine there are some pretty good reasons.”

Laura Riley, a spokesperson for the British Pregnancy Advisory Service, said: “Women and couples who have had donor insemination or IVF to become pregnant are unfortunately no more immune from the harsh vagaries of life than others who are lucky enough to be able to conceive naturally.

“Any woman can experience overwhelming life difficulties, such as intense relationship pressures or the diagnosis of a serious or lethal fetal medical problem. These may mean that she feels unable to continue with the pregnancy.”

From: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/10254133.stm