The Irrelevance of Midwife Licensing
June 10, 1998
Ms. Jane Kilthei
Registrar
College of Midwives of British Columbia
(604) 875-3580W
(604) 875-3581F
Dear Ms. Kilthei,
I am a natural childbirth advocate and president of the California
nonprofit corporation "Natural Woman, Natural Man, Inc."
I read on the Online Birth Center Newsletter (http://www.moonlily.com/obc/obcnews.html) that you are one of Ontario's 119
registered midwives. . . . It is good news to hear that midwives are practicing
legally in Ontario, or in ANY of our so-called civilized nations/territories,
considering the terrible power of the present medical establishment.
I have come upon some information from the OBC Newsletter that I would like you to confirm:
"The College of Midwives of British Columbia are following in
the footsteps of the College of Midwives of Ontario. Prior to Ontario's
registration of midwives in 1994, there were approximately 200 working lay
midwives. Four years and 20 million dollars later, there are 119 Ontario
registered midwives. To find a midwife, Toronto mothers must sign-up
pre-conception.
"There are 20 approved College of BC midwives. The longest
serving (15+ years) and undisputedly hardest working of the province's midwives
received this registered letter:
May 5,
1998
Dear Ms
Lemay,
Confirm
in writing by May 19, 1998 that you have ceased using, orally and in writing,
any name, title, description or abbreviation that implies you are a midwife,
that you are not holding yourself out as a person qualified to practice in
British Columbia as a midwife, and that you are no longer practicing as a
midwife for a fee or otherwise in British Columbia. The College of Midwives of
British Columbia has authority to commence a prosecution against you; if
convicted you could face a fine up to $2,000, a term of six months in jail, or
both.
Govern
yourself accordingly,
Sincerely,
Jane
Kilthei,
College
of Midwives of British Columbia
Jane, I am concerned that the College of Midwives in British
Columbia is taking a stance similar to, if not identical with, the stance taken
by the AMA since the last decade of the last century.
This stance is one that is philosophically opposed to freedom of
choice for the consumer and philosophically aligned with government coercion in
the case of consensual contracts.
Before there were licenses (or "registration"), there
were women helping each other give birth. I believe that women should be
allowed to choose whatever midwife makes them feel most comfortable, whether or
not that midwife has a license.
There is a plethora of literature out there linking maternal fear
with poor outcomes. (Henci Goer speaks of the "cascade effect" that
begins with fear, in her 1995 work, Obstetric Myths Vs. Research Realities).
Any midwife can buy a license, but no midwife can buy trust. And certainly no
midwife can buy a reputation. I believe that licensing is an assurance to the mother-to-be
of only one thing: that a check has been written to a government agency.
I am certainly not against education and training for midwives.
When my wife has a child, I will advocate strongly for a well-trained,
much-experienced, well-educated midwife. I am simply stating my belief that
licensing does not ensure quality services, only
"government-approved" services.
If you believe that government employees are better able to assess
a midwife's capabilities than the mother herself, then you must have a much
wiser government than we have come to know here in the U.S.A.
I hope you will take this letter in the spirit it is intended. I
believe that we are both working hard for the same thing: the health of babies
and their mothers at a time when a certain madness for technology prevails in
the medical community.
Please get back to me, Jane, and perhaps we can discover why we
are of different minds on this matter.
Warm regards,
Jock Doubleday
Director
Natural
Woman, Natural Man, Inc.
A
California 501(c)3 Nonprofit Corporation
http://www.GentleBirth.org/nwnm.org
http://www.SpontaneousCreation.org
director@spontaneouscreation.org