Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38837435›Full record

ArticleBirth (Berkeley, Calif.)2025

Separation at birth due to safeguarding concerns: Using reproductive justice theory to re-think the role of midwives.

Kaat De Backer, Hannah Rayment-Jones, Elsa Montgomery, Abigail Easter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Birth (Berkeley, Calif.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Kaat De BackerDepartment of Women & Children's Health, School of Life Course and Population Sciences, Faculty of Life Sciences & Medicine, King's College London, St. Thomas' Hospital, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5202-2808
Hannah Rayment-JonesDepartment of Women & Children's Health, School of Life Course and Population Sciences, Faculty of Life Sciences & Medicine, King's College London, St. Thomas' Hospital, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3027-8025
Elsa MontgomeryDivision of Methodologies, Florence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery & Palliative Care, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4193-1261
Abigail EasterDepartment of Women & Children's Health, School of Life Course and Population Sciences, Faculty of Life Sciences & Medicine, King's College London, St. Thomas' Hospital, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4462-6537

Funding

National Institute for Health and Care Research NIHR302565
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Separation at birth due to safeguarding concerns is a deeply distressing and impactful event, with numbers rising across the world, and has devastating outcomes for birth mothers and their children. It is one of the most challenging aspects of contemporary midwifery practice in high-income countries, although rarely discussed and reflected on during pre- and post-registration midwifery training. Ethnic and racial disparities are prevalent both in child protection and maternity services and can be explained through an intersectional lens, accounting for biases based on race, gender, class, and societal beliefs around motherhood. With this paper, we aim to contribute to the growing body of critical midwifery studies and re-think the role of midwives in this context. Building on principles of reproductive justice theory, Intersectionality, and Standpoint Midwifery, we argue that midwives play a unique role when supporting women who go through child protection processes and should pursue a shift from passive bystander to active upstander to improve care for this group of mothers.

Indexed as

MidwiferyNurse's RoleSocial JusticeChild Protective ServicesFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornParturitionPregnancychild protectioncritical midwifery studiesmaternity carereproductive justice theorysafeguarding

Identifiers

PMID38837435
PMCPMC12434220

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.