Web Site Search

Return to Front Page

Internet Links  

Feb 3, 2007
Report Medical Board of California

 MBC ~ 
     Consensus version

of the Standard of Care for  California Licensed Midwives'  
Approved by OAL ~ 
effective as of March 9, 2006


California College of

State Chapter of the ACCM for California Licensed Midwives


Secure Communications  
Section for CCM members
click below  
password required

 VBAC info for PHB with a California Licensed Midwife
MBC ~ Regulations March 2006 

California College of Midwives full-text version Standard of Care, March  2006 edition

Archive / sub-directory for Standards of Care  as work in progress / MBC hearing and associated files (2004) CCM's Standard of Care
Section Four ~  
Technical Bulletins & Other Informational Documents
Medical Board of California

Legal & Legislative

State Chapters / C.E.U.s 

CAM website 

CALM website

Citizens for Midwifery

Consortium for Evidence-based practice of Obstetrics  

Lic. Practitioner Issues 
incl. all consent forms 


Senator Lucy Killea's legislative aide, Nancy Chavez, gives excellent advice on how to lobby successfully for midwifery legislation Direct Link to Clinical Competency, Consent Forms and other clinical practice documents

 Misunderstand over SB 1638 and the Standard of Care Client Refusal Provision   

There is a serious misunderstanding among LMs about the recent political and/or legislative events.

I have received emails and phone calls reporting that the Medical Board "rejected" that part of the Standard of Care that acknowledged the mother's right to decline medical care in situation with an 'identified risk factor' (such as VBAC, etc).  

This is NOT TRUE. 

LMs are mixing up the pending legislation and the already passed Standard of Care

The Standard of Care was approved by the Office of Administrative Law on March 9, 2006. It is an unchanged version of the consensus language approved by CCM and CAM members.  

What is true and why the mix-up

In the past few weeks, the wording of SB 1638 (by Senator Figueroa) was changed. The original wording was just a simple sentence that permitted the mother (i.e. midwifery clients) to sign an informed wavier, declining to have her pregnancy "obstetrically supervised". 

The theory was to use the mother's right of informed consent/informed refusal as a mechanism that would, in effect, permit the LM to be in compliance with the physician supervision provision of the LMPA in those circumstances in which the client had herself declined to have her pregnancy supervised by a "physician with obstetrical training and practice." 

This language was rejected by the Consumer Attorneys of California. The bill never even got to a hearing. As a result of this, SB 1638 as originally worded was gutted and replaced with language that currently creates the Midwifery Advisory Council and gathering of practice statistics by the OSPHD. 

Nothing has changed in regard to the Standard of Care.

The language which acknowledges the clients' right of informed refusal is intact and in force.  Period.  No problem.  Zip,  zelch,  nada.  End of story.

Web Site Search

  Website's General Content

Table of Contents

  Return to Front Page