Committee debates licensure for lactation consultants; supporters cite training and access, opponents warn of confusion

The Public Health Committee debated Senate Bill 1373, a measure to license lactation consultants who hold certification from the International Board of Lactation Consultant Examiners (IBLCE) and to reserve the title "lactation consultant" to IBLCE-certified clinicians (often called IBCLCs).

Under the bill, only practitioners certified by the IBLCE may use the title "lactation consultant" or "IBCLC." The legislation would allow other counselors, peer educators, doulas, midwives and WIC staff to continue providing education and support but would prohibit use of the protected title unless the IBLCE certification requirement is met. The bill grants the Department of Public Health licensure and enforcement authority and contains an effective date of July 1, 2026.

Representative Claire DiStitria asked whether a current CLC (certified lactation counselor) would be able to continue calling herself a CLC. "So if this bill passes and becomes law, if I'm a current CLC, certified lactation consultant, will I no longer be able to call myself a certified lactation consultant?" DiStitria asked. The chair clarified that the proposal would not prohibit practice by non-IBCLCs but would reserve the specific title for IBCLCs.

Representative D'Amico and Representative Dauphine spoke against the bill on the record, saying the measure "creates more confusion than it clarifies," citing written testimony from practicing lactation professionals who raised concerns about public confusion and possible unintended effects on access. Representative D'Amico read from submitted testimony that licensing IBCLCs could create "unnecessary burdens for the most skilled providers while allowing those with lesser credentials to practice" and questioned whether licensing would actually secure Medicaid reimbursement.

Senator Ammar and other supporters said the IBCLC is a different clinical level requiring formal training and extensive supervised clinical hours. "For IBCLC, it's 1,000 hours of training, including clinical training that may take up to a year," Senator Ammar said, contrasting that with CLC training described in testimony as roughly 45 hours. Ammar said CMS (the federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services) has indicated that licensure is a necessary step for providers to become eligible for reimbursement and that licensure could be part of a multi-step path toward payment parity and improved access for low-income patients.

Representative Kitt and Representative Gilchrist said the measure is intended to increase access to IBCLC care for low-income patients who currently lack coverage, noting that licensure does not itself guarantee Medicaid reimbursement.

Opponents, including Senator Summers and Representative Dauphine, said many CLCs have long provided care in communities and that licensing the IBCLC title could reduce the apparent workforce available in underserved areas. Several legislators asked for further work on statutory language before the bill moves to the House floor; the chair said the committee would continue conversations with stakeholders.

Procedural action: Representative Belton moved the bill and Senator Anwar seconded. The clerk began a roll call and read recorded votes. As with other items, the chair announced votes would be held open until 3 p.m.; the transcript records named yes/no votes by the clerk but does not close the open-vote period on the committee floor in the portion of the record provided.

Why it matters: The bill would reshape professional titles and licensure for providers who support breastfeeding. Proponents emphasize clinical training and a path to reimbursement; opponents say title restriction may confuse the public and reduce access in underserved communities if CLCs are effectively devalued.

Pending items: Committee members requested further discussion of statutory language and said staff would continue to confer with proponents and opponents before a final floor action.