Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users
to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response
is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual
response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the
browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published
online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed.
Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles.
The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being
wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our
attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not
including references and author details. We will no longer post responses
that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
Whatever the potential impact of recent government policies on infant mortality, this apparent widening was substantially the result of a coding change. The Office for National Statistics decided to abandon its time-honoured practice of coding babies by their father’s social class and instead used a combined approach to deriving the National Statistics Socio-economic Class (NS-SEC) based on the ‘highest’ of both parents’ occupations for babies for whom both were coded. To test the impact of the change, it undertook a ‘bridge-coding’ exercise, comparing both approaches. This showed that the infant mortality rates in the routine and manual group were notably higher when account was taken of both parents’ occupations than when based on the father’s alone.1
In the first instance I look at the policy of our UK government over the time period referred to in this excellent report. On that basis, such a conclusion is hardly surprising. But it is instructive to follow that national policy downstream to a local level. At a local level, decisions are too often being made by elected county councillors with little or no experience in this area. Based upon decisions made by my local council in 2015, I am sadly unsurprised at the conclusion of your report. If the morality of a society is judged by the life chances of its newest citizens, I'm sad to say ours is bankrupt. To be reading this in 2017 is utterly heartbreaking not least because it is so easily preventable.
Coding change disproportionately affected babies with fathers in routine and manual occupations
Whatever the potential impact of recent government policies on infant mortality, this apparent widening was substantially the result of a coding change. The Office for National Statistics decided to abandon its time-honoured practice of coding babies by their father’s social class and instead used a combined approach to deriving the National Statistics Socio-economic Class (NS-SEC) based on the ‘highest’ of both parents’ occupations for babies for whom both were coded. To test the impact of the change, it undertook a ‘bridge-coding’ exercise, comparing both approaches. This showed that the infant mortality rates in the routine and manual group were notably higher when account was taken of both parents’ occupations than when based on the father’s alone.1
1. Office for National Statistics. A combined approach to NS-SEC: an investigation into the potential impact on birth and infant mortality statistics. 20th February 2013. https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160106030326/http://www.ons...
Competing interests: No competing interests