Microsoft AI Criticized for Omitting Crucial Details in UK Maternity Review

Microsoft's AI tool Copilot has been blamed for failing to identify and include critical testimonies regarding "normal birth" ideology in a UK government-commissioned review of maternity care. Hundreds of women who reported traumatic birth experiences due to the pursuit of natural births claim their accounts were overlooked in the final report.

The review, led by Baroness Valerie Amos, considered over 10,500 submissions, including interviews, testimonies, and reports of poor care. Many submissions detailed instances where mothers were allegedly denied pain relief, refused Cesarean sections, or had concerns dismissed in favor of natural births. However, the published report concluded that "normal birth ideology was not currently widespread."

It has since emerged that the inquiry team utilized Microsoft's AI tool Copilot to expedite the analysis of evidence and generate summaries for advisers. Reports indicate that references to "normal birth ideology" present in the original submissions, such as 40 pages of accounts from Oxford University Hospitals Trust, were omitted from the AI-generated summaries. Consequently, these concerns did not form a central part of the review's discussions.

While the specific prompts used for the AI are unknown, NHS England confirmed that the tool was tasked with identifying themes and producing summaries of the submissions. Investigators and advisers were reportedly informed of concerns regarding "normal birth ideology" on multiple occasions and at several evidence panels.

Dr. Bill Kirkup, an obstetrician who previously chaired inquiries into maternity units, resigned from the Amos inquiry team in protest. He stated that advisers relied entirely on the AI's output and did not see the original transcripts or written evidence. Kirkup suggested there might be a "conspiracy of silence" within the NHS concerning natural birth ideology and expressed concern that even when raised in meetings, the issue was ignored.

Dr. Kirkup has communicated his concerns to the House of Commons health committee, which is reportedly writing to Baroness Amos and the maternity minister to seek clarification on how the AI was used and what information was presented to the committee.

In July, Baroness Amos testified before MPs, stating that evidence of "normal birth ideology" could not be found. The report instead highlighted "examples where failure to recognise problems and escalate them appropriately resulted in harm" and that "individual preferences, concerns or changing clinical circumstances were not always fully recognised."

Rebecca Matthews, co-founder of a mothers' group that advocated for the Oxford University Hospitals Trust to be included in the review, obtained confirmation of the AI's use. Matthews, who experienced a traumatic birth in 2016 after her pre-eclampsia was initially not treated with a Cesarean section, wrote to Health Secretary Yvette Cooper. She argued that the AI's thematic analysis failed to reflect the repeated mentions of "normal birth ideology" from Oxford families, meaning the harm experienced there was not properly analyzed. She warned that lessons could not be learned, leaving women and babies at risk.

Former Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt described the potential oversight as "deeply troubling," emphasizing the need to acknowledge and address the dangers of "normal birth ideology" rather than dismiss them.