Being there:a qualitative interview study with fathers present during the resuscitation of their baby at delivery

Objective: To explore fathers' experiences of the resuscitation of their baby at delivery. Design: A descriptive, retrospective design using tape-recorded semistructured interviews with fathers present during the resuscitation of their baby at delivery. Fathers described what happened, their interactions with healthcare professionals, their feelings at the time and afterwards. Setting: Participants were recruited from a large teaching hospital in the UK. Participants: A purposive sample of 20 fathers whose baby required resuscitation at delivery. Results: Participant responses were analysed using thematic analysis. Four broad themes were identified: 'preparation', 'knowing what happened', 'his response' and 'impact on him'. Fathers had no difficulty recalling their emotions during the resuscitation. These feelings remained vivid and were mostly negative. Most fathers wanted to go to their baby during the resuscitation but did not do so. They felt they should stay with their partner, did not want to impede the resuscitation or felt they were not 'allowed' to go to their baby. The fathers' position in the room and the extent to which they were focusing on their partner had an impact on their recollection of what happened. Fathers had no opportunity to discuss the resuscitation with healthcare professionals afterwards. Several fathers felt they had not yet recovered from the experience and a few had symptoms synonymous with post-traumatic stress disorder. Conclusion: This is the first study to specifically explore fathers' experiences of newborn resuscitation. The findings should inform healthcare education, policy development and the provision of support to fathers.

The impact of a father's presence during newborn resuscitation:a qualitative interview study with healthcare professionals

Objective: To explore healthcare professionals’ experiences around the time of newborn resuscitation in the delivery room, when the baby’s father was present. Design: A qualitative descriptive, retrospective design using the critical incident approach. Tape-recorded semistructured interviews were undertaken with healthcare professionals involved in newborn resuscitation. Participants recalled resuscitation events when the baby’s father was present. They described what happened and how those present, including the father, responded. They also reflected upon the impact of the resuscitation and the father’s presence on themselves. Participant responses were analysed using thematic analysis. Setting: A large teaching hospital in the UK. Participants: Purposive sampling was utilised. It was anticipated that 35–40 participants would be recruited. Forty-nine potential participants were invited to take part. The final sample consisted of 37 participants including midwives, obstetricians, anaesthetists, neonatal nurse practitioners, neonatal nurses and paediatricians. Results: Four themes were identified: ‘whose role?’ ‘saying and doing’ ‘teamwork’ and ‘impact on me’. While no-one was delegated to support the father during the resuscitation, midwives and anaesthetists most commonly took on this role. Participants felt the midwife was the most appropriate person to support fathers. All healthcare professional groups said they often did not know what to say to fathers during prolonged resuscitation. Teamwork was felt to be of benefit to all concerned, including the father. Some paediatricians described their discomfort when fathers came to the resuscitaire. None of the participants had received education and training specifically on supporting fathers during newborn resuscitation. Conclusions: This is the first known study to specifically explore the experiences of healthcare professionals of the father’s presence during newborn resuscitation. The findings suggest the need for more focused training about supporting fathers. There is also scope for service providers to consider ways in which fathers can be supported more readily during newborn resuscitation.

The Defamation Act 2013 and CPR 3.4 and 24:a sting in causation’s tail

Examines the Court of Appeal judgment in Tesla Motors Ltd v BBC on whether the claim that a review of a vehicle on the BBC "Top Gear" programme constituted malicious falsehood should be struck out under CPR 3.4(2) on the ground there was insufficient evidence to show that any loss in revenue suffered by the manufacturer was attributable to the review. Considers the implications of the decision for commercial claimants seeking to establish that defamation caused them "serious harm", which, pursuant to the Defamation Act 2013 s.1(2), requires evidence of actual or likely serious financial loss.