Loudon proposes midwife compromise
An updated proposal to legalize midwifery was brought to the Senate today, and the bill’s sponsor says it is a compromise that satisfies many complaints from doctors’ groups.
The changes include requiring midwives to carry malpractice insurance and restricting their ability to administer medication.
Two issues, according to bill sponsor Sen. John Loudon, that could not be worked out are requiring midwives to collaborate with doctors and licensing them by the board that also licenses doctors.
“There are two sticking points that it’s clear we’re not going to get agreement on,” said Loudon, R-Chesterfield.
Loudon’s bill would allow midwives to practice if they’re licensed by a group called the North American Registry of Midwives. Missouri only allows nurse midwives who must partner with a doctor. All other midwives could be charged with a felony.
Sen. Chuck Graham, one of the bill’s chief critics, has argued that not requiring more rigorous medical training for midwives is a threat to public health.
Loudon is a strident supporter of midwives and last year employed a creative technique to allow them to practice. A challenge to that law is pending before the state Supreme Court.
On Tuesday, Graham, D-Columbia, offered an amendment to place midwives under the doctor registration board, known as the state board of registration for the healing arts. Graham said it only makes sense for the doctors’ board to license midwives.
On the contrary, argued Loudon, who said doing so would gut the bill.
“We don’t have the architects looking over the shoulders of the acupuncturists,” he said. “If the doctors don’t want that group (midwives) practicing, they just don’t issue the licenses.”
Graham’s amendment has not yet been voted on. After about an hour of debate, senators laid the bill over to discuss other issues.
(For a more thorough reading of the midwife issue, check out part 1 and part 2 of a series by our own Michele Munz)
Penelope,
I apologize if I offended you. Heather summarizes well my intended use of the word in question.
Since you seem unwilling to inform yourself on this issue, I am happy to provide you with a study, published in the British Medical Journal in 2005, which analyzed ALL home births involving certified professional midwives across the United States (98% of cohort) and Canada in 2000. Please note that the midwives in this study are exactly the midwives we hope to legalize in Missouri, and yes, while it might be difficult to control for variables in many studies of this nature, that difficulty is certainly removed when the referenced study group includes the entire population.
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/330/7505/1416
By the way, I am not a midwife or a lobbyist. I’m just a suburban stay-at-home mom (in Senator Loudon’s district) who could not ignore the evidence supporting home birth, and who believes I should have the right to make the best, evidence-based, health care choices for my children.
I am grateful to be represented by a legislator who has the character to stand up for me.
Penelope no worries the above quote is from John and his Merry Band of Midwives… These people are as fanatical as him. There is no use using logic upon them they are impervious. I’d prefer to listen to actual doctors not midwives or Ms. Loudon.
Note: Earthtojohn- She’s not a medical doctor.
For those of you who “prefer to listen to actual doctors,” I invite you (for the third time) to refer to the article I linked above from the British MEDICAL Journal.
I have experienced both a hospital and home birth in IL before moving to MO. The home births were far safer for me and my babies with far less complications and expense. It is ridiculous that MO does not allow mothers to choose which type of birth they wish for their own safety and that of their babies. How can Sen Graham claim to be a womens’ rights supporter and not support this bill? This bill is all about a woman’s right to choose and I applaud Sen Loudon for supporting it in the face of tremendous opposition. Thank you for writing this article to get the word out about this very important issue for MO women.
IC- I have a few comments in response to your post. Sen. Loudon is working for more than just the views of a “few”. There are so many homebirth families all over this state wishing and waiting for their freedom to choose where and with whom to birth their babies. Even if he was working for just a few, it’s still an important issue considering MO is the ONLY state in the nation where this is a felony!
It’s not that easy to just “get a new doctor” if you have an issue at the hospital. Truth be told, it doesn’t much matter what a woman’s dr tells her during her pregnancy about what she can have for her birth. They’ll find something to force things to go their way. The staff are the ones who strap you down, shoot up your arm, and make you at their mercy to the hospital’s protocols around here. Usually the doctor is just on the phone and comes to catch the baby. If you want options in the hospital you have to FIGHT for them. Birth should not have to be a fight with the parents on guard from the moment they step foot in the hospital. They have enough to be concerned about with their child coming into this world. That’s why women are flocking to homebirth. There’s as revolution going on. Home is more comfortable & just as safe. I want this option LEGAL for my daughters.
I’m glad your wife had a good experience in the hospital. I didn’t, many women I know didn’t. That’s why we want a legal choice. You don’t have to be worried about someone forcing your wife to homebirth. We’re the ones being forced to the hospital in this state!