Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 09/04/2026 8:00:22 AM PDT by Pontiac
Three traditional midwives and an Amish family are suing several Pennsylvania state agencies, alleging that state officials effectively blocked traditional midwives from obtaining the certifications required to practice legally — and that lawmakers then repealed the nearly century-old law governing the profession after the lawsuit was filed. The midwives sued anonymously for fear of retaliation.
The lawsuit centers on a striking sequence of events. The petitioners say Pennsylvania failed to comply with a 1929 law that required certification of traditional midwives. After they filed suit on July 2, 2026, ten days later the legislature passed the annual budget that included a repeal of the Midwife Regulation Law of 1929 — the very law the state previously disregarded. The plaintiffs argue that the repeal was itself unconstitutional and cannot extinguish their pending lawsuit.
The case also raises questions about religious liberty, competition between traditional midwives and the medical establishment, and whether the legislature followed Pennsylvania’s constitutional rules governing how laws are enacted
Traditional midwives generally approach childbirth as a normal physiological process and provide individualized woman-centered care based on the mother and baby, often supporting home deliveries. Their approach differs philosophically from the conventional medical model, in which pregnancy and childbirth are more likely to be treated as medical events subject to standardized protocols and intervention where babies are required to be delivered in hospitals or “birth centers.”
Pennsylvania historically recognized traditional midwifery through the Midwife Regulation Law of 1929, which required people practicing midwifery to obtain a certificate from the state. In 2008, the Commonwealth Court affirmed the law’s applicability to traditional midwives and distinguished them from nurse-midwives who are regulated under the Medical Practice Act of 1985 and must work in collaboration with doctors through the hospital-based medical system. The State Board of Medicine unsuccessfully attempted to prevent a traditional midwife from practicing midwifery and to impose civil penalties of $11,000.
Despite the 1929 law and a 2008 court ruling affirming it, the state appears not to have issued certifications to traditional midwives for decades, with several practitioners reporting that their applications were denied over the past year.
In addition to the certification denials, the plaintiffs cite issues with Senate Bill 507, sponsored by Senator Rosemary Brown (R-Monroe County) and subsequently signed into law by Governor Shapiro on May 6, 2026, as it overhauled Pennsylvania’s regulation of nurse-midwives and created a new certified-midwife license. The legislation requires these licensed midwives to maintain collaborative relationships with physicians or physician groups and to work through the hospital system.
The bill expressly states in Section 4 that it does not authorize or prohibit the practice of lay midwives, direct-entry midwives, or other unlicensed birth workers such as traditional midwives. In an apparent contradiction, it also states that a lay midwife or other unlicensed birth worker who does not hold a license under the bill “shall not be considered licensed or regulated by the Commonwealth.”
The passage of SB 507 with its confusing language and the certification denials prompted Jonathan Scott Goldman of Goldman Team Law, former Executive Deputy Attorney General of Pennsylvania, to file suit in the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania on July 2, 2026, against the Pennsylvania Department of Health, the Department of State, the State Board of Medicine, and the Bureau of Professional and Occupational Affairs.
According to Goldman, the suit was intentionally filed before Senate Bill 507 went into effect on July 6, 2026, due to the apparent contradictory language and concerns that the bill could be held to implicitly repeal the 1929 law, thereby eliminating the independent legal basis for traditional midwifery.
Goldman did not expect what occurred just ten days after the lawsuit was filed.
On July 12, 2026, the legislature passed Senate Bill 146 which became Act 21 of 2026 — also known as the annual budget. Although the bill originally concerned the Veterans’ Trust Fund, its final version contained a provision repealing the 1929 Midwife Regulation Law. The repeal appears on the second to last page in Section 34(3)-(4) of the 191-page legislation.
Section 34(4) states simply: “The act of April 4, 1929 (P.L. 160, No. 155), referred to as the Midwife Regulation Law, is repealed.”
According to Goldman, the state’s attorney subsequently informed him that the repeal rendered the lawsuit moot. Goldman responded by filing an amended complaint challenging the repeal on additional constitutional grounds.
The crux of the complaint is that the state had a statutory certification process on its books for nearly a century, refused to implement it, and then — after the midwives sued — lawmakers attempted to repeal the underlying law through a provision inserted into the budget.
The plaintiffs allege that the version of Senate Bill 146 containing the midwife repeal was considered only once before passage, rather than receiving the three considerations required by the Pennsylvania Constitution. Goldman believes that legislators in both the House and the Senate were mostly unaware that the repeal of the 1929 law was included in the final budget.
Other allegations include religious freedom for Amish and Mennonite families who utilize traditional midwives to birth at home because using a medical system is a violation of their religious beliefs.
Additionally, the lawsuit alleges unfair competition. The plaintiffs argue the State Board of Medicine is structurally conflicted because it is dominated by physicians who operate in the same healthcare marketplace as traditional midwives. They believe that doctors and hospital-affiliated medical professionals view traditional midwifery as competition and ultimately benefit economically if traditional midwives cannot legally practice.
The Shapiro administration did not return a request for comment asking who added the last minute language to the budget to repeal the 1929 Midwife Law.
However, Shapiro’s gubernatorial campaigns have received generous contributions from hospital associations and medical profession unions.
For example, the Hospital and Health System Association of Pennsylvania (HAP), an organization representing 235 member hospitals and health systems, advocated for the passage of Senate Bill 507 and asked legislators to vote in favor of the bill.
HAP’s largest political contribution in 2026 was made to Josh Shapiro in the amount of $100,000.
During his 2022 campaign, Shapiro received over $600,000 from the state’s largest nursing union, SEIU Healthcare.
Meanwhile, according to attorney Jonathan Scott Goldman, the parties are awaiting the court’s ruling on an August 5, 2026, preliminary injunction hearing; regardless of the outcome, the case will proceed to a full trial on the merits.
“Petitioners believe the Commonwealth’s refusal to follow the 1929 Law and court precedent threatens the livelihoods of traditional midwives and affects all who want a home birth in Pennsylvania,” said Goldman. “That someone — after Petitioners filed suit — would seek unfair advantage by slipping a repeal into the 191-page fiscal code in violation of our state constitution almost defies comprehension. Petitioners are grateful to have their day in court and look forward to the court’s ruling.”
Roberta Devers, a midwife of 38 years, views the legislation as yet another attack on traditional midwifery and personalized care for mothers during pregnancy.
“Since the co-opting of midwifery by the medical establishment almost 100 years ago, maternity care statistics have worsened,” said Devers. “The maternal mortality/morbidity rate in the U.S. is 17.9 deaths per 100,000 women. If you are a woman of color, the rate increases to 44.8 deaths per 100,000. Nearly 70 percent of maternal deaths happen after childbirth, with 48 percent occurring late in the postpartum window (between 6 weeks and one year). Among all the other benefits of midwifery care, homebirth midwives make home visits continually in the postpartum period. This personalized continuity of care is only one of the benefits.
“We must return to a system where low risk women are provided with midwifery care and allow physicians to care for high risk women. This midwifery care should include standards of practice that support the true midwifery model of care, not a subsumed version by medicine. We clearly see that the former is a failed experiment.”
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
The Midwifes are fighting back in the courts.
I wish them luck.
Why isn’t the left suing to get more male midwives?
What is the actual history of the maternal mortality/morbidity rate in Pennsylvania?
I don’t think the mid-wives need a law. They should form an organization and establish guidelines regarding training and mentoring within this framework. Once the aspiring midwife fulfills these guideposts, then a certificate is awarded. They could require additional classes and training to keep up with the state of the art in order to keep their certificate current.
This is what is done with Professional Engineers in most states.
Here’s an idea, just go to a regular doctor/hospital to deliver a child.
Seems like a plan that works pretty well.
Our backup midwife in Indiana, for example, was arrested and hauled into court after a pastor and his wife had a stillbirth that she attended. The couple had had three prior stillbirths in the hospital and was hoping that the calmer setting afforded by homebirth might make a difference. Unfortunately it didn't. The prosecution freely admitted that there was no issue with the competence of the midwife and that a hospital would have made no difference to the outcome. In the end I believe she wound up on probation. (The Republican woman who headed the relevant legislative committee was a nurse who had a mindset of "force people to use institutional medicine")
My take is that the free market should hold sway here. If midwives want to form an association and issue certifications, great. But let people choose whom they want, and if they don't value hospitals or value the midwife certifications, so be it.
When Moses was born, the Hebrews in Egypt had two midwives (Shiphrah and Puah: Exodous 1.15). The Bible doesn't say if they were certified.
The Amish are a sentinel species. If the corrupt Pennsylvania government chases them out, Pennsylvania is cooked!
And put your baby into the hands of Big Gov, Nurse Union policies, Pharmaceutical interests and anti-humanist, pro-death Lindsey Clancey supporters?
Midwives are accountable. Corporations are not.
Was that a joke post?
Ping.
Pennsylvania Ping!
Please ping me with articles of interest.
FReepmail me to be added to the list.
Here’s an idea: How about you pay for them to do that? They teach themselves, now, and you want that blocked.
So pay up, Penn resident.
Yes, the Amish have been under unrelenting attack by Pennsylvania for decades.
They are anti-capitalist (they don’t buy from the Conglomerates).
They don’t buy from Monsanto or ADM and they don’t sell to Tyson or Kraft.
They sell to local people that want unprocessed food. How much more un-capitalistic can they get?!
No. The infant mortality rate is the same between the Amish and US Government Hospitals. Why force Amish midwives under socialized Government healthcare purview?
LOL, you seem to be in your own little world, post 3 was a question.
In many counties that’s not as easy as you think.
The corrupt pay for play government of Pennsylvania and the corrupt medical system is at work trying to kill the profession of Midwifery.
_____________________________________
Wow, what timing with the Clancy case. Midwifery care may become the answer for the postpartum issue that is certain to become the hot button issue very soon. The Amish approach is that an uncomplicated delivery should be viewed as a natural physiological event rather than a medical event needing hospital admittance and a doctor’s intervention. Especially note in the article the follow up midwifery care provided by the women after the delivery. How better to have women engaged in this profession and infant care to instruct and provide mental care for the mother - those who may personally know the mother - than to use the antiseptic approach of an in and out hospital event.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.