I WAS delighted to be corrected by clinical midwifery manager Cathy Trinick (Letters, September 9) who reassures us that business continues as usual in the hard-working maternity unit at Fairfield.

Like Ms Trinick, I believe that birth should be treated as a normal process, wherever possible, led by midwives who are professional, caring, woman-centred individuals.

There are many advantages to having a midwifery-led unit available within Greater Manchester, especially when the evidence suggests a reduction in unnecessary interventions. The question of why consultant-led units contribute to unnecessary interventions in the first place is, of course, a much wider one.

If the current recommendations go ahead, then we would perhaps -- for it is by no means certain -- see a midwifery-led unit, but the uncertainty of what shape and form this would take remains of major concern. Will anyone commit, within the proposals, to the unit being full-time, available to women 24 hours a day, for example? It appears not.

And let's spare a thought for those vulnerable women who do need obstetric intervention, or whose babies need special care. My personal memory of a forceps delivery is that it was stressful enough without a rush-hour trip to North Manchester thrown in for good measure!

The support for the special care baby unit has been tremendous. It is understandable that premature and ill babies arouse much more public passion than the labour process which goes before it, but the two are inextricably and undeniably linked -- changes to the maternity unit will go hand-in-hand with changes to the paediatric unit.

What especially worries me about this entire debate is that the recommendations about which people are being consulted are not clearly stated, thereby flawing the process. Informed debate relies on readily available, reader-friendly and full information from the proposing body -- and anyone who has read the available report knows that it does not fulfil that criteria on any count.

DAWN ROBINSON-WALSH