WORKING AS A COORDINATOR MIDWIFE IN A TERTIARY ...

done but found herself losing time negotiating with the couple and the LMC. To her, the
‘small’ intervention of rupturing the membranes prevented a momentous intervention of a
caesarian section but to the couple and the LMC an artificial rupture of the membranes
and fetal scalp electrode were apparently interventions to be negated. In the busyness and
urgency of a critical situation, Sally took an approach she believed would work. She
recalls ‘it took ages and ages’, but “this was the hand she was forced to play” (Harman,
2007, p.28). The outcome was positive but the experience memorable for Sally with ‘time
lost’ with what could have been a compromised baby as a result of the delay in decision
making.
In this situation and Irene’s story below which addresses a different temporality, the
coordinators were not only faced with urgency but also with their midwifery colleagues
verbalising their opposition to siting of a foetal scalp electrode. There is a sense of ‘them
and us’ in these stories, with the LMCs aligning ‘allegiance’ to their clients rather than
professionally addressing what Sally and Irene regarded as safe practice.
Irene enters a room as coordinator to discover the second twin’s heart beat is not audible:
I spoke with the couple and explained that I couldn’t understand why we were
unable to find the heartbeat as it was there earlier on when the labour was less
advanced. I couldn’t find an obvious reason for this and asked the LMC whether
there had been prior discussion of consideration of using the foetal scalp
electrode. The LMC responded that the woman had been adamant in her birth
plan that she didn’t want one. I tried to listen unsuccessfully again for another
129