House Bill 495, titled the Accessing Midwives Act, would create a new licensing framework in Chapter 90 for Certified Professional Midwives (CPMs) and Certified Midwives (CMs) in North Carolina. It establishes a new Article 10B, makes it unlawful to practice or hold oneself out as a licensed CPM or CM without a license under the act, and creates the North Carolina Council of Midwives within the Division of Health Service Regulation to administer the program. The Council would be responsible for adopting rules, verifying credentials, issuing and renewing licenses, setting fees, maintaining records, investigating complaints, and disciplining licensees.
The bill sets detailed licensure requirements, including national certification, CPR and neonatal resuscitation credentials, and agreement to practice under the act and Council rules. It also defines the scope of practice for licensed midwives, including care for healthy clients with normal pregnancies, informed consent, emergency transfer planning, newborn screening and hearing screening instruction, and filing birth certificates. The bill authorizes the Council to create a formulary of drugs and devices appropriate to midwifery care, regulate renewal and reciprocity, and suspend or revoke licenses for misconduct, false statements, criminal conduct, substance abuse, or gross negligence. It also includes exemptions for physicians, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, registered nurses, emergency childbirth assistance, certain birth attendants, and traditional birth attendants serving distinct cultural or religious groups.
If enacted, the bill would add a new state licensing and regulatory structure for midwifery and would likely expand access to licensed out-of-hospital birth care while bringing CPMs and CMs under formal state oversight. It would affect the Department of Health and Human Services, the Division of Health Service Regulation, midwives seeking licensure, and health care providers involved in maternity care and transfers. The bill also includes a liability provision stating that health care providers and medical facilities are not liable for injuries arising from a licensed midwife’s acts or omissions during childbirth, even if they consulted with or accepted a referral from the midwife.
The available context shows no committee debate or recorded votes, so there is no documented floor or committee sentiment in the provided materials. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears generally supportive of midwifery licensure and regulation, with a strong emphasis on safety standards, credentialing, and public accountability. The absence of transcripts or votes means there is no direct evidence here of organized opposition or support, though the liability shield, scope-of-practice rules, and recognition of traditional birth attendants could be areas of interest or concern for stakeholders.
The bill would amend Chapter 90 of the North Carolina General Statutes by adding a new Article 10B governing Certified Professional Midwives and Certified Midwives. It would create a state licensing system, establish a new Council of Midwives under DHHS oversight, authorize rulemaking and discipline, and set standards for practice, renewal, reciprocity, fees, and drug/device formularies. It would also affect related health, licensing, and vital records provisions by requiring licensed midwives to comply with newborn screening, hearing screening, and birth certificate filing requirements, while limiting liability for other providers in childbirth-related injuries caused by licensed midwives.
No committee transcripts or votes were provided, so there is no recorded legislative sentiment to summarize from debate or roll call. The bill text suggests a policy goal of legitimizing and regulating midwifery practice rather than restricting it, with extensive safety, credentialing, and oversight provisions. Overall, the measure appears favorable to midwifery licensure and access, though it also reflects caution through detailed regulatory controls and disciplinary authority.
Potential points of contention include whether the state should create a new midwifery licensing board, the scope of practice and drug-formulary authority granted to licensed midwives, and the bill’s liability protection for health care providers and medical facilities when a licensed midwife is involved. The exemption for traditional birth attendants serving distinct cultural or religious groups may also raise questions about enforcement and equity. Because no discussion transcripts are available, the specific stakeholders holding these concerns are not identified in the provided record, but likely interested parties would include midwives, physicians, hospitals, insurers, and public health regulators.