In unconstitutional “informal sessions,” Mass. Legislature passes far-reaching “midwifery” bill that will affect all residents.

Creates more bureaucracy and regulations, and will increase everyone’s health insurance cost.

Solving this “problem” will lead to more dangerous problems!

October 17, 2924

The "informal sesson" of the Mass. House on August 15, 2024. Four House members along with staffers "voted" before an empty chamber to pass this toxic bill into law. [Photo from State House video of the session.]

Giving birth can be a difficult and dangerous time for both the mother and the baby. All of us know of births where there could have been horrible outcomes. But today’s hospitals saved those lives.

Massachusetts is world famous for its excellent hospitals located across the state. No one is very far from one. And no pregnant woman is ever turned away.

But now our legislature is setting up the structure for an army of “midwives” to go to poor women’s homes to deliver babies, instead of the mothers going to hospitals for the birth. The new law also approves non-hospital so-called “birth centers” for supposed “low risk” pregnancies. To support this, it creates more bureaucracy, regulations, requirements, and additional health insurance mandates which will cause everyone’s premiums to rise.

Passed by unconstitutional “informal sessions” of House and Senate

This bizarre bill, H4999, was “enacted” in House and Senate “informal sessions” on August 15, 2024 - by only six House members (out of 160) and four (out of 40) Senators. But the Massachusetts Constitution requires half of each body for a legal quorum, and that was ignored. The bill was quickly signed into law by the governor.

A dangerous step backwards?

The bill purports to serve “medically underserved populations” defines as:

This begs two important questions: (1) What part of Massachusetts lacks access to a primary care hospital? We don’t know of any. (2) Isn’t it a dangerous step backwards to promote birth at home by a midwife or in a non-hospital “birth center” to a population with high infant mortality? That would seem obvious, except to our elected officials.

A jumble of new bureaucracy, regulations, requirements

To carry this all out, the new law creates a jumble of bureaucracy and related requirements:

• An extensive “committee” to advise the Secretary of Health and Human Services on new regulations, legislation, and related matters regarding midwifery, birth centers, and pregnancy issues. Each committee member serves a three-year term.
• A nine-member Board of Registration in Midwifery to manage that bureaucratic process.
• A Task Force on Maternal Health Access and Birthing Patient Safety – to “study” a long list of issues and make recommendations. [Note the avoidance of the word “mother”!]
• Licensing and certification of “professional midwife” and regulations on midwifery.
• Licensing and certification of “freestanding birth centers.”
• Licensing and certification of “lactation consultant.”
• Requiring doctors to test mothers for various mental health issues and discuss treatments.
• Requiring doctors to test newborn babies for a list of medical conditions, whether the parents want these tests or not.

New health insurance mandates

Everyone’s health insurance is now required to cover the following:

• Pasteurized donor human milk and donor human milk-derived products
• Coverage for treatment of additional mental health issues, including postpartum depression and major depressive disorder screenings.
• Home visiting for mental services, including “physical, emotional, and informational” support services during and after pregnancy.

The law also states, “Such coverage shall not be subject to any cost-sharing, including co-payments and co-insurance, and shall not be subject to any deductible.”

New business mandates

The cost of doing business in Massachusetts is going up.

The new law expands mandated employee “sick time,” stating, “Earned sick time shall be provided by an employer for an employee” to:

• Attend the employee’s routine medical appointment or a routine medical appointment for the employee’s child, spouse, parent or parent of spouse.
• Address the psychological, physical or legal effects of domestic violence.
• Address the employee’s own physical and mental health needs, and those of their spouse, if the employee or the employee’s spouse experiences pregnancy loss or a failed assisted reproduction, adoption, or surrogacy.

Attack on pro-life pregnancy centers

Tucked into the text of the new law is a section that is clearly meant to limit the ability of pro-life pregnancy centers to operate freely and independently:

This extra requirement has never been necessary. Operating an ultrasound machine is simply to show a mother a picture of her developing baby. Pro-life centers should not be required to have a professional person on staff at all times to provide medical care.

Absurd woke language throughout the new law

This should give you an idea of the lunatic state of mind of our legislators. Even though the bill focuses on the issues faced by a pregnant woman, the word “woman” is not found anywhere in the 49-page law.

Instead, the terms “perinatal individuals,” “birthing patient,” “pregnant people,” and “postpartum individuals” are used throughout the text of this new law. Ask your Senator or State Rep to explain that and see what you get back!

Major lobbying force behind this law: A lunatic far-left pro-abortion group!

It should be noted that the most vocal supporter of this law (and apparently the major lobbying force behind it) is “Reproductive Equity Now,” a staunch pro-abortion group.

This photo from the Reproductive Equity Now website shows a member speaking at the Boston Common next to an "Abortion is Health Care" sign.

A representative of Reproductive Equity Now told State House News that this law (instead of being a step backwards) provides a way to “safely” access “care with dignity” and that the legislation serves to “deliver real advancements in birthing justice.” These are the people your legislators are listening to.

The turncoat Republicans legislators who helped

It wasn’t just leftist Democrats in these informal sessions. Rep. Hannah Kane (R-Danvers) and Sen. Patrick O’Connor (R-Weymouth) were also part of them, and voted yes.

O’Connor took the unusual step of making a speech at an informal session – in support of this terrible bill! He called the bill “important overall health care for women” that will “make a huge impact on people’s lives,” and said, “I just want to thank everyone who played a part in making this happen.”  This is what happens to weak RINO Republicans when they’re in office too long.

Final thoughts

The obvious question is: What happens when there is a sudden terrible life-threatening problem during birth, either at home with a midwife or at a local “birthing center”? Do they call an ambulance and hope it gets there in time, and then to the hospital? All to cater to the latest radical fad?

The arrogance of our lawmakers is unbelievable. While the 200-member Massachusetts legislature enjoyed its five-month paid vacation, a small handful came in and unconstitutionally enacted this bizarre new law.

It’s critically necessary that good people stand up to this. Click here to get involved in our effort to end such “informal sessions.”