Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40145023›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in global women's health2025

Protecting emotional wellbeing during childbirth: exploring the role of organisational regulatory processes in promoting compassion.

Caroline A B Redhead

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in global women's health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Caroline A B RedheadFaculty of Business and Law, Manchester Law School, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this article I consider how legal processes have power to facilitate or impede emotional safety and wellbeing for women and birthing people. I suggest that the use of therapeutic jurisprudence to re-view NHS Foundation Trusts' organisational and regulatory processes can offer new insights. Therapeutic jurisprudence is an approach which pays purposeful attention to the therapeutic (or harmful) consequences of legal processes and how they impact the psychological well-being of those upon whom they act. The report of the Inquiry into maternity and neonatal services at East Kent Hospitals University NHS Foundation Trust was the catalyst for the theoretical suggestions I make in this article. In its response to this report, the Government has acknowledged the importance of a culture of honesty, compassion and safety. However, none of the Government's recommendations considers the impact of organisational regulatory processes on the provision of compassionate care. My argument here is that such processes are neither inert nor benign. Critical socio-legal literature provides clear evidence of the anti-therapeutic potential of hierarchical organisational structures, and this is confirmed by the findings of the East Kent Report. Presenting a brief, therapeutic jurisprudence-informed review of some of the findings of the East Kent report, I suggest that a re-view of NHS Trusts' constitution and governance processes might offer the new means of tackling maternity service failures for which Bill Kirkup called in the East Kent Report, with the ultimate aim of ensuring emotional safety and wellbeing for pregnant and birthing people in childbirth.

Indexed as

compassionemotional wellbeingmaternity servicesNHS constitutionorganisational regulatory processesorganizational hierarchytherapeutic jurisprudence

Identifiers

PMID40145023
PMCPMC11937133

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.