A mother in Cardiff is calling for changes in how pain relief is managed during labor and inductions after her newborn daughter died shortly after birth. Liliwen Iris Thomas passed away just 20 hours after being born due to a lack of oxygen. Her mother, Emily Brazier, was left alone and in a coma during childbirth after a reaction to pain medication.

Emily recounts being unable to move or call for help while receiving strong pain relievers like pethidine and codeine without proper monitoring. Her partner, Rhodri Thomas, was not with her due to hospital policy at the time, which restricted overnight stays for partners unless active labor had begun. Hospital records indicated Emily was not checked on for an hour during which she gave birth.

The family was able to spend a short time with Liliwen before she passed away. Following an inquest, a coroner stated that the events should not have happened. The health board has since implemented changes, including supervised use of gas and air, reduced painkiller doses, and reassessed induction processes.

Emily believes these changes should be adopted by all health boards in Wales. She also expressed concern about the investigation into her daughter's death being handled internally by the health board, suggesting an independent body would be better for fairness. The family is also looking into a review of national guidelines on pain relief in labor. They hope that by advocating for these changes, Liliwen's death will not have been in vain and that other families will be spared similar heartbreak. The Welsh government has stated that patient safety is a top priority and that an independent assessment of all maternity and neonatal services in Wales has begun.

Original article (cardiff) (wales) (labor) (inquest) (coroner)

Actionable Information: There is no actionable information for a reader to *do* right now. The article describes changes that have been implemented by a specific health board and ongoing reviews of national guidelines, but it does not provide steps for individuals to take regarding their own pain management during labor or to influence policy directly.

Educational Depth: The article provides some educational depth by explaining the tragic circumstances that led to a mother's call for change. It touches upon the importance of proper monitoring during the administration of strong pain relievers and highlights how hospital policies (like partner presence restrictions) can impact care. It also mentions the coroner's statement that the events "should not have happened," implying systemic issues. However, it does not delve deeply into the medical reasons for the reaction to the medication or the specific protocols that failed.

Personal Relevance: The topic is highly relevant to individuals who are pregnant, planning to become pregnant, or have recently given birth, particularly those in Wales. It raises awareness about potential risks in labor and induction pain management and the importance of patient safety. It could influence how expectant parents approach discussions about pain relief and hospital policies with their healthcare providers.

Public Service Function: The article serves a public service function by raising awareness about a critical patient safety issue in maternity care. It highlights a specific case where a family experienced profound loss due to perceived failures in care and the subsequent efforts to implement changes. It also informs the public about ongoing government initiatives to assess maternity services.

Practicality of Advice: There is no direct advice or steps given in the article for a normal person to follow. The "advice" is in the form of advocacy by the mother and the implemented changes by the health board, which are not directly actionable by the reader.

Long-Term Impact: The article has the potential for long-term impact by contributing to a broader conversation and potential improvements in maternity care standards and patient safety protocols across Wales. The family's advocacy and the government's stated commitment to independent assessments suggest a focus on lasting change.

Emotional or Psychological Impact: The article is emotionally impactful, conveying the profound grief and trauma experienced by the family. It aims to evoke empathy and a sense of urgency for change, potentially motivating readers to be more informed and proactive about their own healthcare experiences. However, for expectant parents, it could also induce anxiety.

Clickbait or Ad-Driven Words: The article does not appear to use clickbait or ad-driven words. The language is factual and focuses on reporting the events and the family's advocacy.

Missed Chances to Teach or Guide: The article missed a chance to provide more practical guidance for expectant parents. For instance, it could have suggested questions to ask healthcare providers about pain management protocols, monitoring procedures, and partner presence policies. It could also have provided links to trusted resources for information on labor pain relief options or patient advocacy groups. A normal person could find better information by researching national health guidelines on maternity care, looking for patient advocacy organizations focused on birth safety, or consulting with independent birth educators.

The text uses strong emotional words to create a sad and sympathetic feeling for the mother and her baby. Phrases like "newborn daughter died shortly after birth" and "similar heartbreak" are used to make the reader feel empathy. This emotional language helps to support the mother's call for changes by making her story more impactful.

The text uses passive voice to hide who is responsible for certain actions. For example, "Emily was left alone and in a coma during childbirth" does not state who left her alone or put her in a coma. This phrasing avoids directly blaming anyone, making it unclear who should be held accountable for her condition.

The text presents only one side of the story regarding the hospital's actions and policies. It focuses on the mother's experience and her criticisms of the health board. While it mentions the health board has implemented changes, it does not include any statements or perspectives from the health board defending their past practices or explaining their reasoning.

The text uses a quote from a coroner to add authority to the mother's claims. The coroner's statement, "the events should not have happened," strongly supports the idea that the hospital made mistakes. This quote is used to validate the mother's experience and strengthen her argument for change.

The text suggests that an independent investigation would be better for fairness, implying the internal investigation was not fair. The phrase "suggesting an independent body would be better for fairness" casts doubt on the health board's internal process. This wording pushes the idea that the health board's own investigation was biased or inadequate.

The text conveys a profound sense of sadness and grief stemming from the loss of Liliwen Iris Thomas. This emotion is powerfully presented through the description of her passing away just 20 hours after birth due to a lack of oxygen, and the family's ability to spend only a short time with her. This sadness serves to evoke empathy from the reader, highlighting the tragic nature of the event and the immense loss experienced by the mother, Emily Brazier, and her partner.

Intertwined with sadness is a strong feeling of distress and vulnerability experienced by Emily during childbirth. This is evident in her being left alone, in a coma, and unable to move or call for help while receiving strong pain medication without proper monitoring. The detail that she was not checked on for an hour during which she gave birth amplifies this feeling of distress, suggesting a breakdown in care. These descriptions are designed to create concern and worry in the reader, emphasizing the dangerous situation Emily faced and the potential for harm.

A significant emotion present is outrage or disappointment regarding the management of pain relief and the circumstances surrounding Liliwen's death. This is conveyed through the coroner's statement that the events "should not have happened" and Emily's belief that the changes made by the health board should be adopted nationwide. The concern about the investigation being handled internally also points to a lack of trust and a feeling that justice or fairness might be compromised. This emotion aims to persuade the reader that a serious problem exists and that action is necessary, potentially changing their opinion about the healthcare system's accountability.

The text also expresses a powerful sense of determination and advocacy from Emily and her family. This is shown through their calling for changes, looking into a review of national guidelines, and their hope that Liliwen's death will not be in vain. This emotion is intended to inspire action in the reader, encouraging them to support the call for improvements in maternity care and to believe that positive change is possible.

The writer uses several tools to enhance the emotional impact and guide the reader's reaction. The personal story of Emily and Liliwen is a central element, making the abstract issue of pain management relatable and deeply human. Phrases like "left alone and in a coma" and "unable to move or call for help" are chosen for their emotional weight, painting a vivid and distressing picture. The repetition of the idea that changes are needed and that Liliwen's death should lead to improvements reinforces the message and strengthens the call to action. By focusing on the personal tragedy and the systemic failures, the writer aims to create sympathy for the family, cause worry about patient safety, and ultimately inspire the reader to support the push for better healthcare practices.