22/01/2026
What if…
What if the problem was never women’s bodies, but the systems measuring birth against rigid timelines designed for efficiency, not physiology? Evidence shows that labour often unfolds more slowly than traditional hospital curves suggest or allow. Research has repeatedly demonstrated that cervical dilation does not follow a neat, linear path, yet policies still expect it to.
What if instead of labelling women as “failing,” we acknowledged that many interventions are triggered not by pathology, but by the clock? When outcomes improve with patience, mobility, continuous support, and trust in physiological birth, why do we continue to blame bodies for not conforming to institutional standards?
What if instead of setting a clock and intervening when the times up, we recognised that things like induction itself are among the strongest predictors of a subsequent diagnosis of failure to progress and assisted/caesarean birth?
What if we stopped treating variation as danger and instead started questioning why one model of labour is imposed on everyone? Birth doesn’t fail. Systems fail when they prioritise policy compliance over individual bodies, informed consent, and evidence.
Maybe it’s time we stopped asking why women aren’t progressing fast enough and started asking why our systems aren’t willing to wait.
During my antenatal courses, we discuss ways to reframe language to help you feel confident in your bodies ability and to know how to navigate a maternity system that is often working within outdated and unrealistic policies. Get in touch if you’d like to book onto a course!