It was one of those epiphany moments. I had driven up to attend a nursing conference in north Wales—I can't remember the focus of the meeting or the main reason for me wanting to be there, although only a few months previously we had launched British Journal of Nursing (BJN) and I had certainly come to help promote it.
It had been a very long drive and I was dying for a cup of tea. My luck was in as the participants had just taken a break. As I stood in the queue, I started chatting to the next person in line, and after I had introduced myself, she told me that she was a midwife.
Without prompting, she turned to me and said that she wished that we would launch a clinical and professional journal for midwives similar to BJN, which she had seen and admired.
That was all the encouragement I needed. It seemed such an obvious and good idea, and by the time I had arrived back in London, I had a plan in place.
I consulted George Castledine, then a professor of nursing at the University of Central England (which is now Birmingham City University), who had helped me launch BJN. He suggested that we asked Christine Henderson, a respected midwife academic at the University of Birmingham, to become the editor. George would be the editor-in-chief.
Christine agreed, and she set about forming a board of key midwifery figures. At our inaugural board meeting, we discussed the pros and cons of whether or not to accept formula milk advertising, which was then perhaps an even more inflammatory issue then than it is today. A majority of the board agreed that we should accept baby milk ads—the only really sustainable display revenue stream for a midwifery publication—although there were some loud dissenting voices. I was very much in favour of this decision for these two main reasons, other than the obvious commercial benefits.
Firstly, we were a professional publication. It was up to our individual readers whether they wanted to pass on information about formula feeding to the women in their care. They did not have to do so.
Secondly, while breastfeeding undoubtedly remains the preferred method of infant feeding, women had a right to choose whether or not to adopt this practice. Some women were unable to breastfeed and others preferred not to. These women should not be made to feel guilty for their decision.
We have stuck to our guns, however uncomfortably at times, throughout the past 25 years, with some midwives at various times cancelling their subscriptions. Other midwifery publications have ‘ducked and dived’, changing their tune where they have felt there was a commercial advantage in trying to undermine us. This is an issue in which hypocrisy is rampant and I am pleased that we have never wavered. It is surely telling that we remain the market leading brand.
We decided to launch British Journal of Midwifery (BJM) at the International Confederation of Midwives' (ICM) triennial congress in Vancouver, Canada, which was rapidly approaching. Our only marketing was the response we received to our advanced subscription flyers, but we knew that we were on to a winner as a result of the subscriptions we were receiving before a single issue had been produced. We launched April 1993 with 1644 subscriptions, rising to 5183 by 2001.
However, our launch was extremely controversial. George Castledine wrote the inaugural editorial, which many midwives found patronising, coming as it did from a nurse, rather than a midwife. They were absolutely right, and we had a number of complaints. As a result, George was immediately removed from having any further involvement with the publication.
And, of course, the issue of formula milk advertising reared its head. I was standing at our stand at the ICM Congress when two Canadian midwives approached me. One took hold of a copy of BJM and immediately started thumbing her way through the issue, searching for the provocative ads. She did not have to search long before finding one, whereupon she opened her mouth and globules of saliva hit my face. I can honestly say that this has been the only time I have every been spat at in my life!
However, not only did we survive such attacks, but we rapidly became the best read and most successful midwifery journal in the country.
I am very proud of what BJM has achieved during the last quarter century. The editorial baton was eventually passed from Christine Henderson, for whom I am full of gratitude, to the exceptionally passionate and brilliant joint editors-in-chief, Professor Dame Tina Lavender and Dr Yana Richens, OBE. I owe them, our committed editorial board and all the staff, including our current, very talented editor, Lauren Newman, much praise for making BJM the outstanding journal that it has been throughout this time. Happy anniversary! Let's now prepare for the next 25 years.