| References | Ball L, Curtis P, Kirkham M (2002) Why do Midwives
Leave? Royal College of Midwives and The Department
of Trade and Industry Partnership Fund.
Baird R, Murray R, Seale R, Foot C, Perry C (2015) Kings
Fund Review of Midwifery Regulation Kings Fund,
London
Bryman A (2012) Qualitative data analysis.In: Social
Research Methods. 4th edn, Oxford University Press,
Oxford: 564-589
Carr N (2008) Midwifery supervision and homebirth
against conventional advice. British Journal of
Midwifery 16(11): 743–5
Cotterrell R (1998) Why must legal ideas be interpreted
sociologically. J Law Soc 25(2): 171–92
Cro S, Bronsky Y (2013) Local Supervising Authority review
and investigation processes. LSAMO Forum, Inverness
Deery R (1999) Improving relationships through clinical
supervision: 2. British Journal of Midwifery 7(4): 251–4
Department of Health (1998) A First Class Service :
Quality in the new NHS. The Stationary Office, London
Department of Health (2014) Independent Midwives:
Insurance options outlined. DH, London
Duerden J (2002) The new LSA arrangements in practice.
In: Kirkham M, ed. Developments in the Supervision of
Midwives. Books for Midwives; Oxford: 129–48
Ewick P, Silbey SS (1998) The Common Place of Law:
Stories From Everyday Life. University of Chicago Press,
London
Falender CA, Shafranske EP, Ofek A (2014) Competent
clinical supervision: emerging effective practice. Couns
Psychol Q 27(4): 393–408
Freemantle D (2013) Part 1: The cultural web-A model
for change in maternity services. British Journal of
Midwifery 21(9): 648–53
Fitzpatrick P (1995) Being social in socio-legal studies J
Law Soc 22(1): 105–12
Halksworth G, Bale B, James C (2000) Evaluation of the
supervision of midwives; Wales. In: Kirkham M, ed.
Developments in the Supervision of Midwives. Books for
Midwives Press, Oxford: 1–32
Hennink M, Hutter I, Bailey A (2011) Ethical issues in
qualitative research. In: Qualitative Research Methods
SAGE, London: 61-79
Henshaw A, Clarke D, Long AF (2013) Midwives and
supervisors of midwives’ perceptions of the statutory
supervision of midwifery within the United Kingdom:
A systematic review. Midwifery 29: 75–85
Hodgson F (2014) A different view of supervisionmidwifery
supervision and regulation:
recommendations for change. Midwifery Matters 140:
17–8
Kirkham M, Morgan RK (2006) Why midwives return
and their subsequent experience. Department of
Health and Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire Workforce
Development Confederation, University of Sheffield
Women’s Informed Childbearing and Health Research
Group
Knight M, Kenyon S, Brocklehurst P, Neilson J, Shakespear
J, Kurinczuk JJ (2014) Saving Lives, Improving Mothers’
Care- Lessons learned to inform future maternity care
form the UK and Ireland Confidential Enquiries into
Maternal Deaths and Morbidity 2009-12. National
Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Oxford
Kvale S, Brinkmann S (2009) Interviews: Learning the Craft
of Qualitative Research Interviewing. 2nd edn. SAGE,
London
McDaid C, Stewart-Moore J (2006) Supervision: how can
the gap be bridged? Midwives 9(5): 180–3
National Health Service Litigation Authority (2013)
NHSLA Risk Management Standards 2013-2014.
NHSLA, London
Nursing and Midwifery Council (2011) Supervision Support
and Safety: NMC quality assurance of the LSA’s 2010-
2011 NMC, London.
Nursing and Midwifery Council (2012) Midwives Rules and
Standards NMC, London
Nursing and Midwifery Council (2013) Supervision,
Support and Safety: report of the quality assurance of
local supervising authorities 2012-2013 NMC, London.
Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman
(2013) Midwifery Supervision and Regulation:
Recommendations for Change. The Stationary Office,
London
Porteous C (2011) A Review of supervisory investigations
and supervised practice programmes. British Journal of
Midwifery 19(7): 453–8
Roseghini M, Nipper B (2013) Group supervision:
An introduction to annual reviews in midwifery
supervision? British Journal of Midwifery 21(12):
888–91
Smith S (2013) Policies for the statutory supervision of
midwifery: nomination, selection and appointment of
supervisors of midwives. LSAMO Forum, Inverness
Spence C, Cantrell J, Christie I, Samet W (2002) A
Collaborative approach to the implementation of
clinical supervision. Journal of Nursing Management
10: 65–74
Stapleton H, Duerden J, Kirkham M (1998) Evaluation of
the Impact of Supervision of Midwives on Midwifery
Practice and the Quality of Midwifery Care. English
National Board, London
Stapleton H, Kirkham M (2000) Supervision of
midwives in England 1996–1997. In: Kirkham M, ed.
Developments in the Supervision of Midwives. Books for
Midwives Press, Oxford: 61–92
Symon A (2006) Risk and Choice in Maternity Care.
Churchill-Livingston, London
Wallace V (2013) Policies for the statutory supervision of
midwives: Annual review of practice by a supervisor
of midwives. Local Supervising Authority Midwifery
Officers (LSAMO) Forum UK. www.lsamoforumuk.
scot.nhs.uk/media/16944/annual_review_of_practice_
by_a_supervisor_of_midwives_policy.docx.pdf
(accessed 1 March 2015)
Williams EMJ (1996) Clinicians’ views of supervision. In:
Kirkham M, ed. Developments in the Supervision of
Midwives. Books for Midwives Press, Oxford: 142–62
van Manen M (1990) Researching lived experience:
Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy. State
University of New York Press, Albany |
|---|