A Woman-centred Maternity System

Why Evidence Alone Is Not Enough

Australia’s maternity system sits at an uncomfortable intersection between strong evidence and inconsistent implementation. On paper, the principles of high-quality maternity care are well established. National strategies, clinical guidelines, and international evidence describe in detail what safe, effective, and respectful maternity care should look like. Yet for many women, the experience of pregnancy and birth still depends heavily on geography, provider, and the model of care they enter.

This disconnect raises a deeper question: why does a system with so much evidence continue to deliver such variable outcomes?

At the heart of maternity care is a fundamental but often overlooked principle: maternity care is healthcare for women. It is the woman who carries the pregnancy, experiences birth, and navigates recovery and early mothering. Yet system design frequently shifts attention away from the woman and towards service activity, risk categorisation, or infant outcomes in isolation. When this occurs, the coherence of care is weakened, and the lived experience of women becomes secondary to system processes.

There is strong and consistent evidence supporting continuity-based, relationship-led models of care, often described as “support and monitor” approaches, where pregnancy is supported as a physiological process with timely escalation when clinically indicated. These models are associated with improved maternal and neonatal outcomes, reduced intervention rates, and improved women’s experiences of care. Importantly, they align closely with what many women report they want: continuity, trust, informed choice, and respectful care.

Despite this alignment between evidence and consumer experience, maternity services continue to be structured around more fragmented, intervention-intensive models of care. The result is not only variation in practice, but also a deeper misalignment between what is known to work and what is routinely delivered.

It is tempting to attribute this to resource constraints. However, this explanation is incomplete. Australia has made substantial investments in maternity care and developed national policy frameworks, including Woman-centred care: Strategic directions for Australian maternity services and national evidence-based clinical guidelines. The challenge is not the absence of direction, but the difficulty of embedding it consistently into practice.

Recent evaluations suggest that implementation remains uneven. Fragmented governance structures, variable uptake of evidence, resistance to sustained system redesign, and limited accountability for outcomes continue to shape service delivery. As a result, the intent of national strategies is not consistently reflected in either the experiences of women or measurable outcomes.

This is where the case for a National Woman-centred Maternity Care Standard becomes significant. Rather than adding another layer of guidance, such a standard would shift the focus from aspiration to accountability. Embedded within existing quality and safety frameworks, it would define what woman-centred, evidence-based care looks like in practice and require services to demonstrate that it is being delivered.

Crucially, this would include midwifery continuity of care models as the default for uncomplicated pregnancy, alongside a stronger emphasis on outcomes rather than activity. It would also require transparent reporting that captures not only clinical outcomes but also women’s reported experiences and measures of equity.

Equity is central to this discussion. Women in rural and remote communities, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women, and women from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds continue to experience disparities in access and outcomes. A system that cannot consistently measure and respond to these differences cannot claim to be delivering high-quality care.

Respectful maternity care also sits at the core of quality. It is not an optional extra or an interpersonal ideal, but a fundamental component of safe, effective maternity care. The World Health Organization has emphasised that dignity, safety, and respect must be intentionally embedded within health systems rather than assumed to occur.

What emerges is not a failure of intent, but a gap between intent and implementation. Australia does not lack evidence. It lacks the consistent translation of that evidence into the systems, structures, and accountability mechanisms that shape everyday care.

The challenge, therefore, is not primarily about doing more, but about doing what we already know works: consistently, transparently, and at scale. When maternity care is aligned with evidence-based principles, women experience safer, more respectful care, and babies benefit as a result.

A woman-centred maternity system would make that consistency not aspirational, but expected. That may be the most important shift of all.

References

Australian College of Midwives. National Midwifery Guidelines for Consultation and Referral and associated policy statements on continuity of midwifery care.

Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care (ACSQHC). (2020). National Safety and Quality Health Service Standards (2nd ed.). Canberra: ACSQHC.

Australian Government. (2024). Closing the Gap Annual Report. Canberra: Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet.

Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2025). Australia’s mothers and babies 2025. AIHW.

Birth Trauma Association Australia. (2023). National Birth Trauma Survey Report.

Bohren MA, Vogel JP, Hunter EC, et al. The mistreatment of women during childbirth in health facilities globally: a mixed-methods systematic review. PLoS Medicine. 2015;12(6).

Department of Health. (2019). Woman-centred care: Strategic directions for Australian maternity services. Australian Government.

Hakimi S, Allahqoli L, Alizadeh M, et al. Global prevalence and risk factors of obstetric violence: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2025;169:1012-1024. doi:10.1002/ijgo.16145

Homer, C. S. E., et al. (2017). Continuity of midwifery care and outcomes. Women and Birth, 30(3), 163–170.

Kildea S, Gao Y, Hickey S, et al. Effect of a Birthing on Country service redesign on maternal and infant health outcomes for First Nations Australians: a prospective, non-randomised interventional trial. The Lancet Global Health. 2021;9(5)–e659

Medway, P., Hutchinson, A. M., & Sweet, L. (2025). ‘Great in theory’: Women’s care experiences in relation to Australia’s national maternity strategy—Qualitative survey responses. PLOS ONE, 20(9), e0319249. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0319249

Medway, P., Hutchinson, A. M., Orellana, L., & Sweet, L. (2024). Does maternity care in Australia align with the national maternity strategy? Findings from a national survey of women’s experiences. Women and Birth, 37(6), Article 101664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wombi.2024.101664

Miller S, Abalos E, Chamillard M, et al. Beyond too little, too late and too much, too soon: a pathway towards evidence-based, respectful maternity care worldwide. The Lancet. 2016;388(10056):2176–2192.

New South Wales Parliament, Select Committee on Birth Trauma. (2024). Birth trauma report (29 April 2024). https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/lcdocs/inquiries/2965/FINAL%20Birth%20Trauma%20Report%20 %2029%20April%202024.pdf 11. World Health Organization. 2025. Compendium on Respectful Maternal and Newborn Care. 2025. https:// References

Pelak, H., Dahlen, H. G., & Keedle, H. (2023). A content analysis of women’s experiences of different models of maternity care: The Birth Experience Study (BESt). BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 23, Article 864. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884 023-06130-2

Raj Kumar, D. (2025). Maternity care in Australia: Is the system working? Victorian Women’s Trust. https://www.vwt.org.au/maternity-care-in-australia-is-the-system-working/

Renfrew, M. J., et al. (2014). Midwifery and quality care: Findings from The Lancet series on midwifery. The Lancet, 384(9948), 1129–1145.

Ferguson Sally, Deborah Davis, ‘I’m having a baby not a labour’: Sense of coherence and women’s attitudes towards labour and birth, Midwifery, Volume 79, 2019, 102529, ISSN 0266-6138, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2019.102529.

Sandall, J., Soltani, H., Gates, S., Shennan, A., & Devane, D. (2016). Midwife-led continuity models versus other models of care for childbearing women. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (4), CD004667. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004667.pub5

The LEAPP Living Evidence for Australian Pregnancy and Postnatal care guidelines.

Vedeler C, Nilsen ABV, Blix E, Downe S, Eri TS. What women emphasise as important aspects of care in childbirth – an online survey. BJOG2022; https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.16926.129:647–655.

World Health Organization – 2025, Healthy Beginnings, Hopeful Futures –

World Health Organization. 2014. Prevention and elimination of disrespect and abuse during childbirth. Geneva: WHO.

World Health Organization. 2025. Compendium on respectful maternal and newborn care.