Give me a break! Aren’t OB/GYN’s given the right to unlimited services to prenancy? Haven’t they provided a path to abortion? Just because the law has now provided a little competition in the field we now have to find fault with the midwives practices by trying to dredge up worst case scenerios. Abortion has been out there for forever. Am I now to believe that because more pregnancies will be handled by midwives the abortion statistics are going to go sky high? That midwives are going to abuse their power? How absurd. Of course this is going to cause panic in the field of OB/GYN’s who are now going to have to compete for their patients.
I know that these Dr.’s have high malpractice insurance costs that aren’t going to be any easier to pay if they lose some of their patient base and I can sympathize, but slamming the validity of midwives isn’t going to change that problem.

The Medicaid code which is referenced does not include abortion, therefore abortion is excluded from the services that may be provided. Abortion by non-physicians is not legalized by this language.

Doctors in the last 75 years in the United States have defined pregnancy as a sickness, and the woman as a patient, thereby insinuating themselves into the process. In point of fact, pregnancy is a temporary condition, and the only “illness” involved is if something goes wrong in the pregnancy which adversely affects the health of the mother or prevents a live birth. (Example: a C-section out of spatial inability to have a normal delivery, not as a convenience to the doctor and mother, who might want the kid born on a “special” day.

It seems to me that surgical or pharmacological interventions using controlled substances like anesthesia are not covered by midwifery, which is designed primarily to provide birthing assistance of the sort provided in generations past by other female relatives, untrained midwives, or granny women. The midwives themselves are the first to understand where their services end and practicing actual medicine begins.

As far as abortifacents: herbal knowledge does not require a midwife. Could someone call on a midwife as a companion during the RU-486 process? Sure, but staying with a friend during a 60s acid trip did not morally implicate the friend, who neither took the acid,nor the trip. I seriously doubt if midwives would open an abortion clinic like the allopathic doctors did.

I don’t believe in abortion but I really am puzzled as to if mid-wifes will make a difference.As far as ob/gyns having to worry about mid-wifes taking away their business….have you been to a hospital lately where ob’s are delivering babies?It’s nutso there.There are no mid-wifes there and babies born every minute or close to it.None of my family ever would go to a mid-wife.They are not qualified.

No way!!!!!!! That is not at all in the standards of care for CPMs. That comment by the docs group is a pure political move to try to discredit their opponents in an attempt to cling to every penny of maternity care.

And, by the way, all national certifying bodies are “private groups,” like the American College of Obs/Gyns is a private group.

Contrary to popular belief, for low risk women, staying at home with a midwife is at least as safe as delivering with a doctor in the hospital, maybe safer since there aren’t all those unnecessary medical interventions that often lead to further problems.

This is bologne! My husband and I had all 3 of our children with a midwife in Texas. What this does is provide and alternative to a steril hospital birth where they tell you when to lie down, when to stop eating and when and how long to push.. Come on folks! Women have been having babies for thousands of years and the medical field has made it something it shouldn’t be.. Without even offering any altenatives and women are naive to the fact they have choices when it comes to their births..

Also it’s important to note that with our 2nd baby we were having some difficulty and the midwife sent us to the hospital which was a block away. Everything was fine and they were smart… With our first baby, she was breech and they did an external version in the OBGYN office and it worked which avoided a c-section..

How this relates to abortion is beyond me. I think it’s crazy to think that the abortion rate will go up because we can legally give birth in our homes or at a birth center.. CRAZY!

BIRTH IS NATURAL! Thank God they decided that it’s time people could make up their own minds about midwifery…

This may be semantics, but the Supreme Court has not power to determine legality. Their purpose is to determine constitutionality of a given practice or existing law. Now, of course, they step over these bounds all too often to make up their own law, but that’s another discussion.

Looks like the doctors are really reaching with their argument. Like a previous post said, women have been having babies for years w/o doctor oversight. It seems like this should be an option available for those that wish to go that route.

Will midwives abort babies? If they get into this practice, they may find themselves in jail when they inadvertantly kill the mother or have to explain to the police about a dead baby on the floor. I don’t think midwives will want to take that chance.

First, children were born, lived or died without the assistance of midwives or doctors.

Both are quite late on the scene of birthing.

What you are trying to balance is the dangers when birthing….to the baby and the mother.

In my opinion, considerations should be given to whether the birth is ordinary or complicated by other factors. A midwife delivered me and I am healthier than 99.99999 percent of the people in this country.

The nut who says that midwives will perform cesarean operations in beyond ridiculous.

This is pure scare tactics by the Missouri wing of the AMA.

I pulled up HB818 (the bill that authorized this), it’s 2992 words dedicated to insurance. There is exactly one sentence that was inserted in it that applies to our discussion:

TOCOLOGISTS - This act provides that any person who holds current ministerial or tocological certification by an organization accredited by NOCA may provide certain types of services (section 376.1753).

These 28 words were rewritten when placed into law, and now read :”Notwithstanding any law to the contrary, any person who holds current ministerial or tocological certification by an organization accredited by the National Organization for Competency Assurance (NOCA) may provide services as defined in 42 U.S.C. 1396 r-6(b)(4)(E)(ii)(I).” (New section 376.1753, RSMo.

It has been litigated before, but section 42 U.S.C. 1396 r-6(b)(4)(E)(ii)(I) has been held before to apply to abortion. In other words, it would be perfectly legal for a person certified as a mid wife while living in Berkley, CA to move here, set up shop and offer abortions. The State of Missouri would have no say, and no oversight. Additionally, the Pro-Life “Hyde Amendment” puts limits on what Abortion services are covered by Medicare – but since Hyde wasn’t incorporated into this new law, it’s limitations don’t apply here.

Talk about the law of unintended consequences.

Still, Midwives are trained in all aspects of childbirth, including Abortion, so I am positive they could provide a safe service, and in a much more friendly environment than a Medical Doctor (sarcasm intended).

Now that my analysis is done, here’s my personal opinion. I don’t care that Midwives are legal, if you want to use a midwife, that’s your choice. However, when it came to birth of my two daughters, we chose a good MD we were both comfortable with. Not all doctors are cold and sterile, some are incredibly kind people who became Doctors out of a sincere wish to help people. If I could do it over, I wouldn’t change a thing.