Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Maternal Mental Health topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Thousands of public commenters urge California board to require perinatal mental-health training; Board refers matter to committees
Summary
Following presentations and dozens of public testimonies describing perinatal mental-health harms, the Board agreed to route consideration of AB 2,279 and AB 2,581 into its workforce-development and outreach processes for further study but made no immediate regulatory mandate.
The California Board of Behavioral Sciences heard extended expert testimony and well over an hour of public comment urging the Board to require baseline education in perinatal (maternal) mental health and to consider menopausal mental-health training for licensees.
Staff introduced the item under statutory direction (AB 2,279 and AB 2,581) that the Board ‘‘consider’’ whether to add courses on menopausal and maternal mental health to continuing-education requirements. Roseanne (board staff) summarized the Board’s ongoing review of degree and continuing-education requirements and said the workforce-development committee is preparing broader curricular reviews.
Elise Springer, volunteer policy chair for the California chapter of Postpartum Support International, framed the issue as a population-level clinical gap: "This is a public health crisis," she said, citing prevalence estimates and links between perinatal mental illness, obstetric complications and maternal mortality. Multiple survivors and clinicians recounted personal and clinical examples of missed perinatal diagnoses, near-fatal outcomes and long delays to appropriate care.
Public commenters included professional associations (CAMFT, NASW-CA), clinicians with perinatal certifications, academic researchers, and several survivors. Supporters asked for a two-track approach: immediate outreach and encouragement of voluntary CE while the Board conducts a methodical review of degree and CE requirements. Opposing or cautious commenters, including CAMFT representatives, said they favored curriculum and degree changes rather than adding many narrowly mandated CE topics and noted risks of an expanding, prescriptive CE list.
After hearing testimony, the Board directed staff to refer the matter into the workforce-development committee for detailed consideration of degree and CE changes and to coordinate with outreach/education for near-term public information (e.g., encourage available CE offerings) rather than adopt a mandate at this meeting.
The Board emphasized that the workforce-development review (starting with LMFT education and later LPCC and LCSW) is a multi-step, multi-year effort. Staff said short-term outreach to encourage available CE and to expand public information is a practical immediate step while the Board studies structural changes.
