Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Health Midwifery Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Utah House approves bill to license direct‑entry midwives after lengthy debate
Summary
After extended floor debate on training, drug use and liability, the House passed the Direct Entry Midwife Act (HB25) 41‑30, adopting an amendment that defines scope, requires certification, permits limited emergency medication use and sets transfer protocols; the bill now goes to the Senate.
The Utah House of Representatives passed House Bill 25, the Direct Entry Midwife Act, on Feb. 8, 2005, approving the measure 41 to 30 and sending it to the Senate. Supporters said the bill legalizes and clarifies the practice of direct‑entry midwifery in Utah, sets education and pharmacology standards and establishes mandatory transfer conditions for complications.
Representative Jackie Biskupski, identified in the bill caption on the floor as associated with HB25, moved Amendment 4 and told colleagues the changes were negotiated with the Utah Medical Association and other stakeholders. "We have created an amendment that we all have come to agree is important," she said on the floor, describing amendments that clarify the definition of direct‑entry midwifery, restrict certain medications, and spell out the transfer process.
Opponents pressed the sponsor on training and scope. Representative Hardy asked whether the 1,350 clinical hours cited as part of training include anatomy and physiology instruction; the sponsor said the clinical hours are hands‑on training and that the academic component covers 800 core competencies and additional pharmacology specific to Utah's proposal. "To qualify for licensure, a direct entry midwife must hold a Certified Professional Midwife credential," the sponsor said, noting the bill adds an extra pharmacology course not used by other states.
Members also debated whether permitting limited emergency medication use at home — the bill allows a one‑dose intramuscular oxytocin for hemorrhage — should be confined to settings with immediate physician availability. Representative Lawrence and others raised liability and safety concerns, noting the risks of delayed transfers and the variable availability of insurance for home birth providers. The sponsor pointed to language in the amendment that requires immediate consultation with a licensed physician and initiation of transfer if the client's condition does not immediately improve, and said the bill contains immunity provisions to protect receiving physicians and hospitals from liability for a midwife's actions.
Traditional midwives and some members warned that licensure and the addition of drugs could marginalize unlicensed or traditional midwives. A representative of traditional midwives who spoke on the floor argued that putting drugs in home settings "increases chances for those who react badly to medications to suffer reactions with no backup help readily available." Supporters countered the bill preserves parental choice and makes training and certification transparent to consumers.
After floor debate and the adoption of the amendment, the House voted and passed HB25 41‑30. The speaker ordered the bill referred to the Senate for further consideration.
The next procedural step is Senate consideration; timing for floor action there was not announced on the House floor.
