“Save St. Mary’s Birth Centre” Briefing Paper*
A response to the current “pause” in birthing and postnatal services at St. Mary’s Birth Centre in Melton Mowbray (now facing closure January 2026)
Introduction
The “Save St. Mary’s Birth Centre” campaign group started by a group of local mums has been operational for about 16 years, responding to repeated questions about the future of the only freestanding midwife-led unit (FMU) serving the geographical area of Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland (LLR), St. Mary’s Birth Centre, in Melton Mowbray. On 19th June 2025 it was announced by University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust that birthing and postnatal services would be “paused” from 7th July at St. Mary’s Birth Centre (SMBC) for a period of six months. There is growing concern that this “pause” will result in a permanent closure. We are keen to avoid that happening for several reasons outlined in this paper.
The campaign has three current aims:
- Reopen SMBC in the short-term.
- Revisit the long-term decision to close SMBC and relocate services to Leicester.
- Resource SMBC for whole Trust impact to ease the pressure on city centre maternity sites.
Reopening St. Mary’s Birth Centre in the short-term
- Safety
The Trust’s statement on 19th June mentions the challenges of being able to staff SMBC safely. Yet at no point have any underlying safety concerns been raised by the CQC (Care Quality Commission), or has there been any known incident which might suggest there are critical safety issues needing response. We therefore maintain this is fundamentally a staffing problem, not a safety problem.
A 2023 CQC report made mention of the staff keeping up to date with their training and stated they “should be proud of the safe care they were providing”. We are unclear about what has changed between the CQC report of 2023 and where we find ourselves today and why, if there is any concern, this cannot be rectified.
- Staffing levels
The Trust’s own judgement is that 12.2 WTE midwives are required for SMBC. However, Birthrate Plus® – the nationally recognised framework for maternity workforce planning to which the UHL aligns itself – recommends just 5.51 WTE midwives to achieve safe staffing at SMBC (FOI 29th July 2025; answered 3rd September 2025). The Trust’s figure is more than twice as many as the framework suggests and sets an incredibly high bar to maintain sustainable staffing levels. It is not obvious why only in respect of SMBC, the Trust feels the need to set a target falling outside the methodology they are happy to adopt elsewhere, especially given the Trust is currently saying this cannot be met.
The Trust’s statement mentioned unsafe staffing levels due to an unfortunate combination of staff maternity leave, sickness, and planned absence. Given the CQC report offered no concerns about staffing levels at St. Mary’s Birth Centre in 2023, noting instead there were enough suitable staff, we are unclear as to why this set of circumstances in 2025 cannot be seen as a short-term issue which is fixable. We further question whether staffing levels could be resolved with bank staff. In any case, we would expect these issues to be resolved in time and not prevent a re-opening in due course.
- Low birth figures
Whilst it is true that low birth figures are recorded at SMBC – just 92 last year – we have plenty of anecdotal evidence that women are not being offered SMBC as a place to give birth in (see appendix i). This is also confirmed by a report from members of the Health and Policy Unit at De Montfort University. Dr. Sally Ruane, a member of the university research group told the Melton Times in 2020:
“We have heard several mothers complain that they were not informed about the option of St. Mary’s and the research suggests this experience is not uncommon.”
If women do not know it is an option, they will not choose it.
These figures also do not take account of the number of women who transfer into SMBC for the postnatal care having given birth elsewhere, or the labouring hours supported by staff prior to any transfer out during the birth – both of which demand resources in other ways.
It is worth noting that a FOI request revealed that a FMU at the University Hospitals of Morecambe Bay, where there has also been a fall in birth rates, have not seen more than 92 births a year since 2018, and had only 19 in 2024, representing just 1% of births at the Trust. The same FOI confirmed that there have been four temporary suspensions there in the past ten years, but it has always reopened and is currently remaining open.
- Finances
Finances were not mentioned in the official statement; however, we appreciate there is a question of NHS resources when thinking about the future. We suggest SMBC could help save money if it is promoted by the Trust better. Whist the Trust statement mentioned fewer women are eligible to use the service, we again point to the anecdotal evidence we have suggesting many low-risk mothers who would be classed as eligible are not being offered it as a choice (see appendix i). If more women were able to choose SMBC rather than the Leicester Royal Infirmary (LRI) or the Leicester General Hospital (LGH), this could relieve pressure on maternity resources in those hospitals.
Dr. Sally Ruane points out,
“Available evidence shows that free-standing midwifery units such as St. Mary’s are highly cost-effective, even when run at a third of capacity, because they use far fewer resources than obstetrics units.”
Notwithstanding the very real challenges, given the language of “pause” it will be very difficult to accept that the Trust has been open and honest surrounding this recent decision if it does not reopen in January 2026 or is not forthcoming soon with a plan to mitigate the issues identified to reopen as soon as possible, at least in the short term -pending reconfiguration (see below).
Revisiting the long-term decisions
- Building Better Hospitals For The Future
Years of uncertainty about the long-term future of St. Mary’s were brought to a head in June 2021. Following the CCG’s Building Better Hospitals For The Future consultation of 2020, which highlighted plans to reconfigure maternity services across the Trust, the decision was taken to locate all FMU birthing services to a temporary midwife-led birth centre at the LGH. The language of “relocation” was used rather than “closure” and assurances given about services being protected until the new provision was available. However, the relocation was never guaranteed to be permanent under the proposals and offered only on a short 12-month “trial” basis, which many argue is not long enough to establish demand and proof of impact.
Further, at a consultation event on 29th October 2020, Ian Scudamore, then Clinical Director of Women’s and Children’s Services at the UHL NHS Trust, confirmed that in the event of the birth centre being effectively moved to the LGH, the postnatal ward would not be, losing forever the option for inpatient care around postpartum recovery –including vital breastfeeding support. To be clear, this is a closure of a much-used service currently on offer within the Trust, for women who either give birth at SMBC or who transfer for postnatal care after giving birth elsewhere.
It is worth noting that the results of the LLR-wide consultation showed that 41% of respondents disagreed with the decision to relocate the FMU to the LGH, versus the lower figure of 36% who agreed.
It is also worth noting that the Chair at the time of the Joint Health Overview Scrutiny Committee, Cllr Patrick Kitterick, expressed “deep concerns” in a June 2021 letter to the then Chief Executive of the LLR CCG, Andy Williams, about how the decision-making process was being handled, pointing out that, “the consequences of the potential decisions will be far reaching and affect Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland for decades and potentially will see an effective closure of a hospital and a maternity unit”.
As campaigners, we remain unhappy with the decision-makers ignoring the wishes of those consulted and with the lack of commitment even to the notion of a relocation. We are concerned that, contrary to promises, in the time since the decision was made, the Trust has failed to do what is necessary to safeguard services at SMBC until such a time they can relocate, even in the proposed slimmed down and temporary state.
- Better Births
A 2016 national maternity review called Better Births, highlighted the importance of women having more choice and control over their maternity care, including where they give birth and what postnatal care they can access, with services tailored to individual needs and preferences. This includes being able to offer births in four distinct locations: at home, in a freestanding midwife-led unit (FMU), an alongside midwife-led unit (within a hospital site) and in a hospital obstetric unit. Closing our only FMU, St. Mary’s Birth Centre, will clearly limit choice for women.
This is a backwards step in local women’s healthcare.
By comparison, in Oxfordshire there are three FMUs (Cotswold Birth Centre; Horton Midwifery-led Unit; Wallingford Maternity Unit) and in Wiltshire there are two (Frome Birth Centre; Chippenham Birth Centre). Maintaining just one FMU to service the two counties of Leicestershire and Rutland does not seem unreasonable.
Better Births confirms that for low-risk women there is no evidence that outcomes are worse in a FMU when compared with those in “alongside” midwifery units and that women who plan births in FMUs have a lower likelihood of intervention. Less intervention means a better birth experience for women with quicker recovery rates and has the potential to save the Trust money.
Our position remains that the proposals consulted on as part of Building Better Hospitals For The Future failed to accommodate the findings of the Better Births maternity review and therefore there is a good argument for revisiting the decision taken regarding St. Mary’s Birth Centre in Melton Mowbray.
Resourcing SMBC for whole Trust Impact
This is a whole Trust issue, not just a Melton Mowbray issue. Whilst it is vital to protect services in rural communities such as Melton, we recognise that even with a growing local population the birth and eligibility rates mean keeping SMBC open is a challenging proposition, if focussed on providing the service solely through the lens of Melton’s projected needs. However, women come to SMBC from across the LLR area (see appendix i and appendix ii). We maintain, that with the correct promotion to low-risk women, the Trust could reduce pressure on services at the LRI and LGH where most births currently take place – even low risk ones – thereby benefiting maternity services as a whole. We invite the Trust to see SMBC not as a burden, but as part of the solution.
- CQC Report
The 2023 CQC report concluded that St. Mary’s Birth Centre should retain its “good” rating whilst downgrading services at the LRI and LGH to “requires improvement”. At the time, we expressed concerns that the Trust might look to divert resources away from St. Mary’s to help tackle the issues in maternity services at the two city centre hospitals. In October 2023, the Leader of Melton Borough Council, Pip Allnatt, wrote to the then Chief Executive of the ICB, Andy Williams, a letter containing the following:
“At our Council meeting on 28th September 2023, the latest position regarding maternity services in Melton and Leicestershire was discussed. We are aware that the latest CQC inspection found a “deterioration in the level of care” being provided for those using maternity services at both the Leicester Royal Infirmary and Leicester General hospital, with the ratings for both hospitals dropping from ‘good’ to ‘requires improvement.’ In contrast, inspectors of the midwife-led unit in Melton praised the safe care being provided by staff at the unit.
We recognise that the decision to close the birthing unit in Melton has been taken but were assured at the time that the proposal was a relocation, not a closure, and that the St Mary’s centre in Melton would not close until the new unit was open and operating effectively in Leicester.
As you will appreciate there is ongoing anxiety amongst residents about this issue, and I would be grateful if you can provide reassurance that the St Mary’s Centre will not close until the issues identified within the Leicester hospitals have been resolved.”
To date, there has not been a full and proper response to the letter sent.
Meanwhile, considering the 2023 CQC findings, we urge the Trust to be looking towards St. Mary’s Birth Centre for best practice to inform the rest of the maternity offering, rather than limiting its usage and influence.
- Staffing
Lead campaigners (Helen Cliff and Anna Foster) had a meeting on 24th July 2025 with the CEO of the UHL Trust Richard Mitchell, during which it was communicated that the Trust have recently been turning midwives away for jobs, at the same time as closing SMBC due to staff shortages. We question what barriers are in place to stop them recruiting specifically for SMBC and if they could be overcome with enough will. Or, if any thought has been given to creative, whole-trust solutions.
For comparison, a 2023 CQC report for Chippenham Birth Centre in Wiltshire (which recorded 46 births between March and October 2023 and was found to be “good”), included the following statement:
“The service did not always have enough maternity staff with the right qualifications, skills, training, and experience… However, managers regularly reviewed and adjusted staffing levels and skills mix, and gave bank and agency staff a full induction.
The birth centre could adjust staffing levels daily according to the needs of women. Births at the centre were staffed by the home birth team, community midwives and the community midwife on-call.”
We note that even with some of the same challenges, the CQC still considered the Chippenham Birth Centre to be safe, and that Chippenham Birth Centre remains open. We wonder if this more flexible approach to staffing – particularly the use of the home birth team and agency staff – could help solve the staffing issues faced by SMBC.
We also note that Rossendale Birth Centre operates as an on-call birth centre and wonder if this has been considered for SMBC rather than a withdrawal of services completely.
- Location
One argument put forward during the 2020 consultation was that any FMU provision for LLR needs to be in the city so more women can access it. However, we maintain that the FMU being located in Melton Mowbray is not a problem for LLR and is not the reason for the low birth figures there. Factoring in city centre traffic, parking challenges, navigating a larger hospital site and getting in front of a midwife means journey times for comparison are not reflective of the true time it takes to travel between various locations either to the LRI or LGH vs SMBC (see appendix iii).
A report presented to the Trust Board on 12th June written by Julie Hogg, Andrew Furlong and Danni Burnett, entitled “Paper E” outlined the reasons given for the temporary suspension of intrapartum and postnatal care services at SMBC, one of which was “equitable access”. In relation to equity, the report refers to needing to improve care access for those communities facing the greatest need – and links this to ethnicity. By implication, the assertion is that the predominantly white population in Melton are less disadvantaged and enjoying disproportionately favourable access to services when compared to other more disadvantaged places across the Trust area. The report points out that 84% of SMBC births are white and draws an unfavourable comparison with the proportion of the birthing demographic across the Trust. However, what this actually demonstrates is that SMBC already has a reach beyond the borders of Melton Borough (which has a white population of 96%), serving a much wider catchment. Anecdotal data also points to SMBC serving the needs of residents beyond Melton itself.
The use of averages across the Trust also assumes an even ethnic distribution across the entire geography of LLR which is not the case. Leicester City, for example, has a far more diverse make up than many of the rural market towns surrounding it. Indeed, the report does acknowledge that “…The geographic location of SMBC, and its distance from more urban, ethnically diverse populations, may contribute to these patterns” -somewhat negating the rest of the analysis. Whilst it is reasonable for the Trust to consider how to move resources around the system to support those areas of greatest need, the analysis relating to ethnicity is overly simplistic and unhelpful. Equity of access covers more than just ethnicity. Rural communities are also entitled to have equitable access and should not always be expected to travel to centralised provision – a point being made by the agenda of our current Health Secretary. The paper’s argument taken to its logical conclusion would mean that all services must be centralised in or around the city, therefore negating the government’s drive towards community and neighbourhood health.
On the broader matter of location, the Trust has admitted: “There has been no immediate work to learn from other Trusts covering rural locations” that are able to sustain and make use of FMUs as part of their offering for birthing women (FOI 29th July 2025; answered 3rd September 2025). It is our view that a serious attempt to retain services at SMBC should include learning from elsewhere. We therefore remain concerned this is further evidence that the Trust is failing to take all the measures possible to avoid a permanent closure.
- Co-location with other services
Considering the government’s vision for a new model of NHS care, which emphasises a move from “hospital to community,” moving much loved maternity and postnatal services in the opposite direction (from community to hospitals), seems counterproductive.
A pertinent question is whether co-locating services, particularly with ongoing discussions about Melton’s hospital, might help find a solution. We note the ICB is still working on, but yet to confirm, a location for a second GP Surgery in Melton Mowbray and wonder if this offers an opportunity to work with the NHS Trust and other partners to explore ways to share buildings and costs to keep St. Mary’s Birth Centre open.
An example highlighted in the Better Births Review is the Barkantine Birth Centre at Barts Health Trust, co-located with a GP practice, dental surgery, and pharmacy.
- Postnatal care
Regardless of birth figures, there remains an important question about the postnatal ward, which is held in high regard by women across LLR, with many transferring there for care after giving birth elsewhere.
Unfortunately, the Trust does not hold the data relating to usage centrally, and our request for the number of women who have used the postnatal ward over the past 10 years was declined based on time and cost (FOI 29th July 2025; answered 3rd September 2025). It is therefore not possible to give a more precise data point relating to this. However, anecdotal data is strong.
Many mums credit the postnatal care received at St. Mary’s for helping them to establish breastfeeding (see appendix ii). Indeed, the 2023 CQC report confirmed that the postnatal ward is “of particular benefit to women with complex needs or those who needed additional support with breastfeeding.”
Breastfeeding initiation rates across the Trust were at 64% in April 2025. This is well below the national figure of around 81%, according to UNICEF. UNICEF also highlight that the UK has some of the lowest breastfeeding rates in the world, with many citing lack of support as the reason for giving up. The long-term health benefits to both mother and baby of breastfeeding are well established. It is therefore vital to protect the care currently on offer, which is much needed but so lacking in the larger hospitals.
Many mums also credit the postnatal care at St. Mary’s for spotting health concerns with their baby after they were discharged from a larger hospital and giving them confidence at the start of their mothering journey (see appendix ii).
We would welcome moves to protect the postnatal ward at St. Mary’s Birth Centre, which needn’t be staffed by midwives, in the event the Trust fails to safeguard the option to give birth there.
Summary
In Summary, whilst we appreciate the challenges faced by the UHL NHS Trust, we believe there are options available that have not yet been explored to both re-open St. Mary’s Birth Centre in the short-term and secure its future in Melton Mowbray for the longer term. These include a flexible use of the homebirth staff team and potentially co-locating services. We suggest keeping St. Mary’s Birth Centre open could benefit the Trust as a whole and avoid removing choice or taking a retrograde step in women’s health services throughout Leicester, Leicestershire, and Rutland. We remind the Trust of the value to women of being able to access an FMU. As Dr. Sally Ruane confirms,
“Midwife-led units like this often provide a better experience for low-risk mothers as they are more likely to enable the women to give birth ‘normally’ without interventions such as induction, forceps, epidurals, or caesareans.”
Each intervention comes at a cost to the woman, physically and emotionally, as well as a financial cost to the Trust deploying resources.
Closing St. Mary’s Birth Centre in Melton Mowbray also stands in opposition to the government’s vision for a new model of NHS care which centres on the principle of “hospital to community.” We see no reason to preclude birthing and postnatal services from this agenda and expect the Trust to be developing a plan to re-open St. Mary’s Birth Centre in January 2026 at the latest.
The Trust’s response to the results of the 2025 NHS Maternity Services Survey published in December 2025, includes the “commitment to listening to women and families to ensure their voices shape our services.” We urge the Trust to make good on this commitment and listen to the hundreds of voices who turned out to demonstrate in in August and signed the petition to both re-open SMBC and keep it open.
Author: Helen Cliff, founding member of “Save St. Mary’s Birth Centre” Campaign Group and elected councillor for Melton Borough Councillor (2023-).
*An earlier version of this paper was circulated to interested parties in August 2025. This is an updated version (December 2025) to include further information received from FOI requests submitted to the UHL NHS Trust and the Trust’s response to the 2025 NHS Maternity Survey.
Notes:
CQC Report for St. Mary’s Birth Centre RWE10 St Mary’s Birth Centre
Melton baby unit rated ‘good’ while city maternity services are downgraded
New study argues Melton baby unit should be kept open
Building Better Hospitals Presentation to the LLR Joint Overview And Scrutiny Committee 8th July 2021 – PowerPoint Presentation
Better Births national-maternity-review-report.pdf
CQC Report for Chippenham Birth Centre RD102 Chippenham Community Hospital
Breastfeeding in the UK – Baby Friendly Initiative
Appendix i Testimonials About St. Mary’s Part One
Not being offered St. Mary’s as an option:
“It’s a hidden gem, and not many people know about it” – Ady Dayman, BBC Radio Leicester
“It was never offered, and I’ve never seen it advertised other than a poster (which isn’t very clear). Thankfully, I heard about it from someone who had been.” – Lucy, Loughborough
“I wasn’t told about St. Mary’s. My best friend told me about it.” – Danielle, Thurmaston
“I wasn’t offered either time, 20 months or 7 years ago.” – Jendayi, Leicester
“I was offered Melton with my first, but I hadn’t heard of it. This was from an Oakham community midwife. With my second I wasn’t. I had a cover midwife from the LGH and believe that was the key difference. I gave birth to both my boys at St. Mary’s. The nearest hospitals to me are almost 1 hour away, Peterborough or Leicester. I wouldn’t have made it to either, both times.” – Kimberley, Barleythorpe
“Despite being low risk and wanting a water birth, St. Mary’s was never mentioned to me as an option. I found out through an NCT contact and I’m so pleased I did. After a traumatic experience in early labour at the supposed home-from-home suite at the LRI, I discharged myself and went to St. Mary’s. I ended up having the most wonderful, empowering first birthing experience. A complete contrast to the LRI” – Helen, South Wigston
“I only knew about St. Mary’s through classes I took whilst pregnant. It wasn’t given to me as an option until I asked. Thanks to the help offered from St. Mary’s I managed to exclusively breast feed for 6 months.” – Danni, Shepshed
“It wasn’t offered as an option, but I knew about it. I transferred myself for antenatal care at 28 weeks I had my first at St. Mary’s. With my second I had to have him in Leicester but then went for postnatal care. The birthing centre is the most wonderful place with incredible staff and really needs to be expanded rather than close” – Melanie, Kibworth
Needing a local facility:
“With number three we were only there six minutes before she was born so having somewhere local was absolutely essential.” – Emily, Melton Mowbray
“My second and third births I wouldn’t have made Leicester, and both would have been born in the car. Thank goodness Melton was open.” – Heidi, Melton Mowbray
“With a super speedy labour, she would have been born in the car if we’d had to travel further.” – Lucy, Langham
Appendix ii Testimonials About St. Mary’s Part Two
Importance of the post-natal ward – and sometimes having to fight for it
“Had my son at the Royal. Told the midwife I’d like to transfer to St. Mary’s and was asked: ‘what’s that?’” – Becca, Mountsorrel
“Gave birth at Leicester General and transferred to St. Mary’s for postnatal care/breastfeeding support as the midwife told me they couldn’t help me there.” – Amy, Oadby.
“Ended up having number one at QMC due to complications. Afterwards I wasn’t offered St. Mary’s but asked to go there. They sounded confused and told me he was feeding well (I knew he wasn’t). Thankfully, I pushed and went to St. Mary’s. It turned out he had posterior tongue tie, only noticed by St. Mary’s staff. If I hadn’t been I’ve no idea how I would have coped.” – Amy, Melton Mowbray
“I had my postnatal care there and I’m so glad I did. If I hadn’t, I don’t think I’d of ever breastfed because the hospital showed me nothing.” – Alison, Melton Mowbray
“Transferred from the Leicester General for postpartum care and help with breastfeeding. My stay at St. Mary’s did wonders for my confidence and set me up for success going home with a newborn.” – Ema, Anstey
“I was totally lost after the experience of an emergency c-section under general anaesthetic. But I was given wonderful care at St. Mary’s and reassurance with breastfeeding. It was the midwife at St. Mary’s who noticed the jaundice developing in my daughter and we were able to get prompt care for her before it got too serious.” – Claire, Markfield.
“I gave birth in Leicester but was transferred to St. Mary’s following a traumatic birth/complications and the staff were amazing looking after us both. Elderly family were able to visit.” – Lisa, Melton Mowbray
“I gave birth at the Leicester General, and a senior midwife recommended the transfer to St. Mary’s because the General didn’t have the right support for postpartum recovery and breastfeeding.” – Rosie, Leicester
“Wasn’t offered but heard through word of mouth it would be good support with feeding and before heading home to older sibling – which it was. Midwife at Melton picked up concerning issue with baby which the doctor had missed at the General. We were then sent straight to neonatal ICU.” – Amy, Leicester
“Mentioned to one midwife at the LRI to go back to St. Mary’s for aftercare but was pretty much ignored.” – Rachael, Oakham
“I wasn’t offered St. Mary’s. I was offered Peterborough, Kettering, and Leicester. I’d heard about St. Mary’s, so asked to go there. Both the birth and the aftercare were amazing. I wouldn’t have successfully breastfed had it not been for the support. I’m currently due number two and am really anxious about the prospect of not being able to give birth at St. Mary’s again.” – Alice, Rutland
Appendix iii Travel Times From Around Leicestershire And Rutland
.
| Travelling by car from: | To SMBC + 2 minutes* | To LRI + Up to 30 minutes* | To LGH + Up to 20 minutes* |
| Melton Mowbray | 5 minutes | 44 minutes | 36 minutes |
| Syston | 22 minutes | 27 minutes | 19 minutes |
| Loughborough | 31 minutes | 34 minutes | 33 minutes |
| Market Harborough | 47 minutes | 38 minutes | 36 minutes |
| Wigston | 46 minutes | 14 minutes | 16 minutes |
| Coalville | 46 minutes | 32 minutes | 42 minutes |
| Market Bosworth | 52 minutes | 36 minutes | 47 minutes |
| Hinkley | 51 minutes | 29 minutes | 43 minutes |
| Bottesford | 28 minutes | 53 minutes | 47 minutes |
| Oakham | 20 minutes | 46 minutes | 32 minutes |
| Uppingham | 30 minutes | 41 minutes | 27 minutes |
Notes: For the purpose of comparison, travel times are based on town or village names rather than exact postcodes, as per Google Maps Directions on 23rd July 2025, travelling in the afternoon between 2pm and 4pm during the school holidays. At “school run” time or on “match day” in the city, we would expect these times to be longer.
*Parking, navigating the hospital estate to the right department, getting in front of a midwife or healthcare professional. Extra time stated is anecdotal data based on firsthand experiences of those who have recently given birth at or visited the respective facilities.
saveournhsleicestershire.uk 
Leave a comment