To all California Midwives originally posted --> July 24th, 2003
Here for the text of
the proposed regulation
Click here to read the
California College of Midwives'
written testimony for the Rulemaking File
and its supporting documents.
(How Childbirth became as a Surgical Procedure)
was held by the Medical Board
August 1st at the Embassy Suits Hotel. They did not vote on the regulation. Instead they scheduled an additional hearing for Nov 7th which was held in San Diego. Despite the great distance, Senator Figueroa flew in and testified on behalf of its passage. The Division of Licensing again choose not to vote on the regulation. One of the Board member's stated that AGOG and CMA had indicted that they would sue the Board if the regulations as proposed were implemented. To avoid litigation, the Board moved to send the regulation to the state Attorney General's office for a formal written opinion as to whether the regulation would be considered "legal". This may take several months.
Board of California
the 7 MBC members
of the Division of Licensing
at the above address.
Members of the advisory board are appointed
by the governor and are a very different group of people
from staff of Sacramento-based agency)
The Division of Licensing Members are:
Dr. Michael Karlan,
Dr. James Bolton, PhD, M.F.T. Vice-President
Dr. Richard Fantozzi, MD, Secretary
Dr. Bernard Alpert, MD
Dr. Gary Gitnick, MD
If you have
urgent questions or serious concerns
you may contact faith gibson, LM, CPM
Frank Cuny (CEO of
California Citizens of
Health Freedom @ 888 / 557-8092
Board of California
Midwifery Supervision and Standards of Care
Specific Language of Proposed Changes
(1) Add Article 4 before section 1379.20, to read as follows:
Article 4. Midwifery Practice
(2) Adopt section 1379.23 in Chapter 4 or Division 13 of Title 16,
California Code of Regulation, to read as follows:
1379.23 Supervision and Standards of Care.
(a) The requirement for supervision shall be deemed to have been met if a midwife has documentation of any of the following:
(1) The client is currently receiving ongoing care from a physician or clinic.
(2) The client is receiving care from a health care service or plan or other organized health plan.
(3) The client has refused medical care by a physician in accordance wi6h Section 2063 (editor's note --> section 2063 is the the religious exemptions clause) of the code or in accordance with the client's right to make an informed refusal of care (See Thor v. Superior Court (Andrews), 5 Cal.4th 725.855 P. 2d 375.21 Cal.Rptr.2d 357.365(1993)).
(b) The standard of care shall be that of the midwifery community.
NOTE: Authority cited: Section 2018 and 2507(f) Business and Professions Code
(3) Renumber Article 4 to Article 5
(4) Renumber Article 5 to Article 6.
These are good regulations which are both helpful to midwives and protective of the consumer. I urge you to support them and to initiate supportive letters from the families you serve and from your friends and community.
warm regards, faith gibson ^O^