Tuesday, November 16, 2010

A Summary of the Illinois Home Birth Safety Act

Here's a summary of the Home Birth Safety Act (Illinois SB 3712). I meant to write this ages ago; I hope it's not too late for people who want to be informed about this bill!  You can read the full text of SB 3712 here.

It legalizes CPMs but establishes the title of Licensed Midwife (LM). You can also call yourself "LM, CPM" if you hold CPM certification. However, see below; it sounds like CPM certification is a requirement for licensure.

Licensure requirements (pp.27-28):
  1. An Associate's degree, either a general degree or nursing or midwifery, including life sciences, biology, and pharmacology.
  2. Complete a 3-5 year midwifery education program approved by the North American Registry of Midwives including "clinical internship"
  3. Pass a written and practical exam
  4. Hold a valid CPM credential
It sounds like existing CPMs could be "grandfathered in" before August 2010, but since the bill didn't pass before then, would that date be moved? Interestingly, no evidence of practice submitted for licensure can be used against midwives if it occurred before the Act legalized such practice (p. 28 lines 9-13) though don't trust me on that, I'd figure it out for yourself before endangering yourself!

Midwives would be enabled / required to (pp.6-7):
  1. give prenatal care and testing according to ACOG guidelines
  2. provide 24 hour on-call availability
  3. provide labor support and supervise delivery
  4. provide postpartum observations until mother and baby are stable, for no less than 2 hours
  5. complete birth certificates
  6. offer metabolic blood screening of the newborn
  7. offer vitamin K injections
  8. offer administration of antibiotic eye ointments (gonorrhea prophylaxis
Medications midwives would be enabled to use, with strict dosing limits written into the bill (pp.8-12):
  1. Oxygen for fetal distress
  2. The aforementioned eye antibiotics (tetracycline and erythromycin)
  3. Oxytocin or Pitocin for postpartum hemorrhage prevention or treatment
  4. Methergine for postpartum hemorrhage
  5. Cytotec for postpartum hemorrhage
  6. Vitamin K
  7. Rhogam
  8. Intravenous fluids (lactated Ringer's solution, which is water with electrolytes) for "maternal stabilization"
  9. Lidocaine injection for local anesthesia for repairing perineal tears
  10. Sterile water injections to the lower back for nonpharmacological pain relief (?? I don't know anything about this!)
Midwives must have a formal relationship with an obstetrician or certified nurse midwife (p.21), including quarterly reviews of client records, but not requiring their presence for clinical care, and must consult with them when needed, such as (pp.13-20): 
  1. Pregnancy-induced high blood pressure or persistent severe headaches
  2. Persistent urinary tract infections
  3. Significant vaginal bleeding, not associated with labor or uncomplicated spontaneous abortion
  4. Rupture of membranes before 37 weeks
  5. Notable decrease in fetal movement, or no fetal movement
  6. Anemia (low hemoglobin) that doesn't respond to supplements (i.e. iron, B vitamins?)
  7. Fever > 102 degrees for more than 24 hours, or > 100.6 at delivery
  8. Nonvertex presentation (i.e. not head down) after 38 weeks
  9. Persistent vomiting or dehydration (hyperemesis)
  10. Rh negative sensitization
  11. Elevated blood sugar levels resistant to dietary changes
  12. Positive HIV or genital herpes
  13. Malnutrition
  14. Suspected blood clots (deep vein thrombosis)
  15. Low-lying placenta after 28 weeks
  16. Labor before 37 weeks
  17. Gestation longer than 42 weeks "by reliable confirmed dates" (remember the Day 14 myth!)
  18. Multiple gestation
  19. Prior uterine incisions. Home midwives may attend not attend first-time VBACs but may attend subsequent VBACs. In other words no initial HBAC, home birth after cesarean.
  20. Abnormal ultrasound findings (low fluid, restricted growth, etc)
  21. Failure to void the bladder 6 hours postpartum
  22. Signs of significant maternal depression
  23. Dozens of findings related to the infant, including Apgar < 6 at five minutes, respiratory distress, low birth weight, failure to pass meconium by 48 hours, jaundice, etc.
Consultation does not precluding the possibility of out-of-hospital birth.

Guidelines for emergency transfer to hospital include the emergencies you'd expect, but explicitly delineated (pp. 19-20).

Midwives may NOT (pp. 22-23):
  1. Give prescription medications to induce or augment labor
  2. Use vacuum extractors or forceps
  3. Perform "major surgical procedures" including "abortions, cesarean sections, and circumcision"
  4. Accept primary care for a woman with significant organ system disease, cancer, insulin dependent diabetes, confirmed Rh disease, alcoholism, drug abuse, current serious psychiatric illness, and several other conditions 
The seven-member Illinois Midwifery Board will consist of (pp.23-24):
  1. Four CPMs with three years out-of-hospital birth practice
  2. One obstetrician or family practice physician with at least two years out-of-hospital birth practice
  3. One certified nurse midwife with at least two years out-of-hospital practice
  4. One "knowledgeable public member" who has given birth with the assistance of a CPM at home (interesting)
After three years of the passage of this Act, no one may act as or give themselves out to be a home birth midwife without being licensed under this Act. Midwives who are unlicensed but still practice are subject to a civil penalty up to $5,000 in addition to any other penalties under law.

The rest of the bill has to do with administrative issues, how Board membership is managed, and disciplinary actions and license suspection/revokation (nothing seemed out of the ordinary here, basically revolving around people who violate the Act).

8 comments:

  1. As an insulin-dependent diabetic, I cringe when states "legalize" and license midwives. I am planning my second hbac in a state with relatively loose guidelines governing homebirth midwives (they license midwives, but unlicensed midwifery is not illegal), but we're considering a move to Illinois to be nearer to family. I'd rather midwifery be illegal completely, than for the state to allow only licensed midwives, but disallowing women and their care providers from making the important choices regarding the mother's health. I honestly don't understand why the medical establishment, and state legislators apparently, are so against women making choices for themselves, if they wish to.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Licensing limits parents rights, I think a parent's right to choose how and with whom they birth should trump licensing. I agree with what Kari said.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I don't really understand the insulin-dependent diabetes exclusion. A properly managed Type 1 diabetic is probably healthier than your average Type 2 diabetic, no?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Couple of links for you about the sterile water injections:
    http://www.childbirthconnection.org/article.asp?ck=10187

    and
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18837842

    Seems to be a good option for women wanting to limit their exposure to pharmaceuticals in labor as well as something that could easily be administered at a home birth where many CPMs are likely to practice.

    HTH!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Considering the fact that Illinois midwives have been persecuted and jailed for trying to help women have homebirths this may be better for their families. IT amazes me that rather than legislate incompetent medical providers of which there are plenty so much time is devoted to limiting women's birth choices by trying to control midwives and the women who choose them. The trick for midwives will be finding an ob/gyn willing to work with them--that may be why this is a trick, who in Illinois will line up to back CPM's. And once they are legal one' hopes they can accept Medicaid allowing poor women the homebirth option. Providing a midwife the opportunity to get a living wage is not wrong. I remember accepting a mixer as a payment for a birth that cost me 1000 worth of time and supplies--not to mention the years of going without while getting my midwifery education.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Yes, insulin diabetics can have healthy pregnancies and be healthy women, just like anyone else. I think it's important to work with a good endocrinologist during the pregnancy (my insulin requirement triple by the end of my pregnancy, and this pregnancy, my endo is trying to convince my insurance company that cgm is "medically necessary" because I've had so many low bg incidents that required assistance to recover from). I keep my a1c in the low 5s during pregnancy, try to eat healthy, and stay active. I am fully aware of the importance of controlled bg levels, understand the risks to me and my baby if I don't keep them maintained.

    With my first pregnancy, I saw an ob, and ended up being induced at 37.5 wks because I was diabetic. No other reason. My baby was fine, he was measuring fine, I was fine, everything was fine. I ended up with a section because the doc upped the pit so fast I was having a solid contraction for an hour; no valley--all peak. Of course my son's headrests decelled, and they cut me after just four hours of "labor."

    I hear a lot of crap about aging placentas, big babies, and all kinds of other stuff, but from my layman's Internet research (and honestly, there's not a lot out there), the complications start when sugars get out of control. And mine don't.

    I tried to go back to the hospital for a vbac, and was pretty much laughed out of the office of every doc I talked to; I was "high risk" and I had a scarred uterus. So now I homebirth. I like it that way, because I can decide what tests need to be done, I can go "post-dates," I can avoid the hell that is pitocin, and the bigger hell that is c-section recovery, and I can have a healthy pregnancy and a healthy baby. I like that.

    If they want to risk diabetics out of the homebirth world, then the obs better start listening to us, and practicing with their heads instead of their asses.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Ditto on the sterile water injections (seen quite a few references to them, and I know you would find them interesting).

    @Kari-Even for non-diabetics, obs need to listen and not just blindly practice.

    ReplyDelete
  8. The arbitrary 42 week thing is very bothersome to me. It's near and dear to my heart as my perfectly healthy, best-Apgar-scores of the bunch, daughter didn't arrive until almost 43 weeks (my midwife is convinced my dates were off, but as I had 2 kids 3 and under when she was conceived, I, uh, am positive when it happened.) In absence of other issues, like low fluid, placental issues, bad NSTs I really don't think it's advisable to start inducing because you hit the magical 42 week marker. I was fortunate enough to have a midwife willing to bend the rules.

    This is a great article that explores where the idea that stillbirth rises with postdates alone. It's just not true.
    http://www.midwiferytoday.com/articles/timely.asp

    ReplyDelete