I am very glad that I was out of town this past week when a number of things happened with midwifery legislation in the state of Missouri. Apparently, a bill that would allow CPMs a way to provide services in Missouri is on the governor's desk. What I want to know is how this happened, especially since Senator Graham had been vowing to filibuster at any chance he got.
My understanding is that an amendment was placed on another bill (HB 818) that referenced a federal statute. They did not use any of the following hot button words: midwife, midwifery, pregnancy, childbirth, postpartum, etc. They merely referenced the statute. So, in essence, if a midwife is licensed in another state, she (or he) can provide services in MO.
Some say the way it was done was unethical, underhanded and even dishonest. How is it dishonest? Each and every senator and representative had the chance to read the amendment and ask questions. Someone could have asked about the federal statute that was referenced. Out of all the legislators, couldn't someone have researched it, or had someone they trusted research it?
In my personal opinion, I don't know if I would have done it this way. However, I am outraged that Senator Loudon is being called a liar. There is much work for our legislators and many paths which they can take to get the work done. Senator Loudon played within those rules just as Senator Graham played within the rules when he took such a vehement stance against midwifery. I didn't like what Senator Graham was doing, but I respected that it was what he needed to do since he felt so strongly about his position to keep women and babies out of the hands of the best prenatal, labor, delivery, and postpartum care in low risk situations.
By the way, Senator Graham was one of those who didn't do his research. In the end, he voted for midwifery. Maybe I should call him and say thanks for supporting midwifery. Wouldn't that just make his day.
-deanna
1 comment:
Here is the actual wording of the amendment for anybody dying for the details :)
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)."
Here's the translation:
Not worrying about any other laws, anybody certified by NARM (this would be CPMs), may provide childbirth-related services. The alphabet soup at the end is a federal regulation defining prenatal and birth care.
So it doesn't actually refer to other states, though I don't know if that is a plus or minus. It also does not remove midwifery from the definition of the practice of medicine. It does make CPMs legal, but there will be a lot to hash out down the road.
Love,
Lynn
Post a Comment