Utah Midwive’s Association statement on the Vickie Sorensen trial

Here is the Utah Midwives Associations official statement:

We, the Utah Midwives Organization, are aware of the reported charges against Vickie Sorensen, a midwife in Cedar City, UT. The charges are very serious. We are always concerned when there has been loss of life or potential misconduct of a midwife. 

Midwifery care is meant for normal pregnancies proceeding in a normal manner, and there are definitely times when pregnancy is outside the scope of midwifery practice. We cannot comment on this case specifically as it must work its way through the legal process. 

We offer our condolences to the family who has suffered the loss of their child.

This statement reminds me a lot of when MANA’s death rate came out. They said that midwifery care is for low risk pregnancies (as to excuse the astronomical rates of death for twins, vbac, and breech births), but did not make any practice recommendations. The Utah Midwives Association has done the same thing- they have said midwifery care is only appropriate for certain pregnancies, but does not have plans to actually change anything legislatively to ensure that midwifery care is only dispensed to women with low risk pregnancies. 
It also reminds me of the Valerie El Halta fiasco. When that happened Utah midwives also acted as though this was some kind of isolated incident or a deviation from the normal, but I happen to know that two of the midwifery schools in Utah teach breech, vbac, and twin births to students. I know that the trade magazine for home birth midwifery calls all these conditions “a variation of normal”. I’ve read Ina May Gaskin books that say the exact same thing. 
The standard you walk past is the standard you accept, and unless UMA lobbies for common sense policies to ensure the safety of moms and babies I will be forced to assume that they find the legislative situation of utah midwives acceptable. 

The mention of the family is appreciated. I wonder if their condolences extend to plans to make sure no other family ever has to endure such a tragedy again?


Vickie Sorensen’s victims should not be buried twice

Dr Amy Tutuer of the Skeptical OB has a very apt saying about home birth deaths- the babies get buried twice. First in the ground by their parents, and then by the home birth midwives who wish to bury the memory of what happened. It does not have to be that way- take action, call your legislators and let them know that you don’t find it acceptable that its harder to legally drive a car than it is to legally deliver a baby in our state.

It may seem like common sense that the law changes after this, that legislators will wake up to the problems with voluntary licensing and voluntary insurance for midwives, but that did not happen last time a horrific home birth death happened in Utah (at the hands of serially negligent midwife Valerie El Halta). The reason nothing changed is that Utah midwives stand up for each other regardless of how heinous their actions might have been. Right now, instead of asking themselves how this could have been allowed to happen or how to prevent it the next time, they are raising funds for Vickie Sorensen’s defense. They are denying reality by trying to say that this is persecution or that there is no merit to any of the charges (we will have to wait and see, but I have yet to see a midwife charged in a case like this that is let free- there are simply too many witnesses in home birth deaths).

They also have a leg up because legislators like Holly Richardson support home birth, even after the bill she passed cost a life (now we know its cost many more than that). I brought this to her attention and she ignored me and my concerns. She is running for house district 57 in pleasant grove, and will no doubt push the home birth agenda if she is elected. She is a major reason this state of affairs exists in the first place, but she has washed her hands of all responsibility. You will see that she more or less blames parents for not being diligent enough in checking references, but in both Utah home birth deaths the midwives in question have glowing reviews from a large number of people and professional achievement (El Halta wrote for Midwifery Today, Vickie Sorensen was integral to the original Utah Midwives Association). The Utah Midwives Association (now the Utah Midwives Organization) had a meeting about how to best cover this up and prevent any laws from being passed. The El Halta death happened very shortly before the legislative session opened so no one else was organized enough to change the law.  It seems that the lack of action from that death has unfortunately allowed other deadly midwives to operate legally.

These babies need you and me to contact everyone we can to try and prevent the next death. Midwives refuse to police themselves and prefer to have a total lack of supervision or guidelines for their practices. There is actually an official guide for home birth midwives to avoid accountability for deaths they attend, it is called From Calling to Courtroom. You can read it here. You will notice that a lot of what Vickie Sorensen is accused of doing- lying on medical records, interfering with EMTs, etc is encouraged in this book. This is standard operating procedure for home birth midwives.  You and I are the only thing standing between negligent midwives and the next preventable death- please help, it will only take a few minutes of your time.

You can sign a petition demanding licenses and insurance for midwives here. 

Utah midwives make a mockery of peer review

Peer review is a process that exists in many disciplines, usually ones with high stakes decision making like medicine or science. The purpose of peer review is to verify the truth, and sometimes to recommend a disciplinary action (if the peer review arose out of an incident that ended poorly).  Peer review can be very scary for those who are going through it, since the idea is to be critical of a person’s actions or ideas. No matter how scary peer review is for the person being reviewed, it is absolutely essential to everyone else that it be done. Drugs cannot be put on the market because the researcher’s feelings might be hurt if someone points out a flaw in their study of its safety. Doctors cannot be allowed to keep practicing in a negligent manner because the peer review board thinks doctors should stick together. Everyone recognizes that patients and the public in general are the reason for peer review.


…everyone except direct entry midwives of course.


I found the utah midwive’s association’s peer review protocols, and they are an absolute joke. You aren’t allowed to question why a midwife performed a certain action. You will be asked to leave if you ask why someone chose the course of action that they did- this means even if someone died or was disabled because of the action, other midwives aren’t allowed to be critical of it.  You are only allowed to ask if they considered a different course of action. You aren’t allowed to hurt another midwife’s feelings, that seems to be the main concern throughout the document. They do peer review for “educational” reasons, although I don’t know how much education can be gleaned from a discussion where critical thought (which generally involves asking hard questions) is not allowed.

Interestingly enough, you also aren’t allowed to be honest about your case if it involved anything illegal. Here is what the practice guidelines say:

  • Please do not present cases in which there has been or may have been illegal conduct, such as an unlicensed midwife administering medications or a licensed midwife acting outside her scope (delivering twins, for example). We want the review to be a safe place where we can learn from each other. Announcing that you have engaged in illegal or questionably legal activities as a midwife puts you and each participant in an emotionally, ethically and legally perilous situation. Just don’t do it!


How are the midwives who are doing illegal things supposed to learn about the dangers of it if they aren’t allowed to discuss it in peer review? The utah midwive’s organizaton has lobbied to make it so that unlicensed midwives can take on any client they feel comfortable with, regardless of the risk level involved, and now they refuse to even let these women learn the error of their ways through a peer review instead of by personally maiming or killing someone. Its deplorable. It is worth noting that the majority of midwives in utah do not decide to become licensed, likely so they can practice outside the state’s guidelines. The Midwive’s College of Utah and Community School of Midwifery both teach skills for homebirths that fall outside the license midwife’s standard of practice (such as twins and breech births at home). These practices are encouraged in the name of “trusting birth”, and bragging rights of course. I’m sure its wonderful to be the breech expert in town like Melody Pendleton claims to be.


You can contrast their joke of a peer review process with an actual hospital peer review protocol. 

When the findings of the assessment process are relevant to an individual’s performance, the medical
staff is responsible for determining their use in peer review and/or the periodic evaluations of a
licensed independent practitioner’s competence, or in connection with any corrective action, in
accordance with the procedures and standards set forth in the Medical Staff Bylaws, Credentialing
Procedures Manual and Corrective Action and Fair Hearing Plan.


Peer review is the review of the clinical activities of members of the Medical Staff by other qualified
practitioners with comparable training and experience who can render an unbiased opinion on the quality of


Peer review is supposed to be about improving the care provided. Advising participants to lie about their activities or to avoid hurting anyone’s feelings is just another piece of evidence that direct entry midwives aren’t professionals, they just pretend to be to deceive more Utah families into hiring them.

If your baby dies or is injured in a home birth, if your midwife fails to show up or lies to you about the safety of your pregnancy, if your midwife does ANYTHING she isn’t supposed to, these are the people you are supposed to be able to turn to. But they will do nothing to help you, they turn their backs on anyone who does not aid them in the goal of hiding the deaths and injuries caused by home birth midwives in our state.

Jessica Weed- the next Valerie El Halta?

Those who follow this blog or home birth stories in general are aware of the tendency of midwives to move around when the cops come knocking. Jessica Weed is no exception. Here is what she did in New Mexico:

Jessica Weed, a midwife in Albuquerque, New Mexico, helped in the breech delivery, when a baby is positioned to be born feet first, on August 28 but the newborn suffered bleeding on the brain and in the retinas after the complicated birth.  

Additionally, the mother’s placenta was not delivered and the woman, Kristin Himm, developed an infection when it became toxic.

two days after the birth, Himm took the newborn to the hospital on August 30 and Weed allegedly told the mother not to disclose that the midwife had delivered the baby because Weed said she was having problems with her Midwifery license, according to the Albuquerque Journal.

Imagine my surprise when I saw that Jessica Weed is still in business as a ‘birth guru’ despite demonstrably poor judgment and training. One of the cities she has hosted trainings in the past is Provo, Utah.

jessica weed in provo

What would prevent Jessica Weed from delivering babies here? Absolutely nothing. She has a CPM credential, which is more than enough to secure clients. Other midwives support her just like they do every other dangerous midwife, because sisterhood matters more than safety to non-nurse midwives.  The credential is more than Valerie El Halta had when she secured clients in Utah after a history of trouble in other states. 

You might be thinking that guilt is an adequate deterrent. Perhaps Jessica feels bad about what she did and does not intend to deliver babies anymore, right? 

jessica weed still attending births Wrong!

“I had a beautiful birth last night with me just sitting in the corner, as the parents asked. It is so nice to see a birth just happening as it should without any interference at all! She even birthed her own placenta like a champ!”

Remember that this is a woman who got in serious legal trouble for failing to intervene when a reasonable person would.  She still waxes poetic about the beauty of not doing ANYTHING during a birth.

Maybe you are thinking- she probably just learned from past mistakes and incorporated the experience into her practice. Wrong again!

jessica weed unassisted birth not a good option lolShe does nothing but whine about how it was unfair and how she did nothing wrong. These are not the words of someone who has learned from their mistake- she would have to admit a mistake was made to learn from it. 

The highlighted portion is worth noting:

“If you don’t have the choice of a midwife and a homebirth, your only choice will be to birth in a hospital or to go it alone at home without support. Those are not good choices for most women who would choose homebirth!”

There are two issues with Jessica Weed deciding that unassisted childbirth is a poor choice.

The first problem is that her case is proof that not having a midwife is often superior to having a non-nurse midwife. If you look at her case you will see that the client had concerns and Jessica told them it was fine. Over and over she said it was fine, and when it became clear that it wasn’t fine, she advised the parents to lie to the hospital about her role in the birth (which by definition prevents her from participating in the exchange of important patient information with the hospital). Both of these things put the patient in more danger than if they had birthed at home alone. A concerned parent without expertise will go to the hospital when concerns arise or call 911. The mother likely could have been spared a serious infection and the child could have been monitored and treated for their internal bleeding. A care provider who insists on lying to cover her own legal bases instead of giving priority to protecting patients runs the risk of giving inaccurate information to physicians (or failing to give important information at all). Jessica Weed pretends that midwives never make things worse, when she should know first hand that they can.

The second problem is that Jessica Weed promotes Unassisted Childbirth (which she calls ‘freebirth’). This means she is either lying about the safety of freebirth or she is lying about the utility of a lay midwife during home births. The common theme here is that she says whatever will earn her more money at the time. 

Jessica Weed has Unassisted Childbirth (‘freebirth’) coaching for 1000$ a pop. 

freebirth coaching jessica weed She is willing to charge 1000$ for emails and phone availability, despite her history of saying “everything is fine!” when medical attention was needed. 

I am alarmed by the lack of restrictions on midwives and their practices. A physician or a nurse that has their license suspended for negligence cannot simply pack up and start practicing somewhere else without some major hurdles in the way. There are literally no hurdles for midwives who kill or maim- they get to keep going, all with the support of other midwives who are too invested in keeping unlicensed midwifery legal to care about what it costs babies and families.  Utah midwives, including political candidates like Tara Tulley and Holly Richardson, have no problem with the system as it stands. They would likely welcome Jessica Weed or Christy Collins to Utah with open arms and kind words, if their welcome of Valerie El Halta is any indication. 




Holly Richardson responds

Holly Richardson left some comments on my last piece about her. Lets get the easy stuff out of the way, by disproving this bit that Holly said:

And ps: I have not hosted a “midwifery meeting” in almost 10 years. Your “facts” are, in fact, wrong.

holly gave presentationwhoops July 2013 was last year, not ten years ago.  I have my own copy of the audio from the meeting from before UMO made their page private, I will upload it soon. Now that thats out of the way, we can move onto the comments with some meat to them:

While I’m flattered you want to highlight my campaign, your anti-midwife agenda will get you nowhere in this state.

I am not anti-midwife, I am anti-unaccountable medical practitioners. I am sure that the majority of people in utah are.

And really, you have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to Utah law, the process we went through, or the mood on the Hill.

Holly does not cite the portion of the law that would prove me wrong or tell me exactly where I made an error, I am very interested in knowing where I made a mistake. I will correct it if it is demonstrated to me.

Sadly, you’re not even brave enough to use your real name to attack political candidates.

I don’t use my real name because I blog about my abuse history, and it is humiliating to me to have anyone googling my name find out that it happened to me. Newspapers use this same standard in their reporting, and it is reasonable.

 I am proud of my work on behalf of midwives in this state. We have a long history of safe midwifery care.

I linked to several stories of extremely dangerous breech, vbac, and twin births being presided over by utah midwives. Holly is already aware of how unsafe Valerie El Halta’s practices were, because they killed someone who did not have to die.

Dr Amy Tueter has a saying about home birth babies that die- they are buried twice. Once in the ground, and again by midwives and their advocates who don’t want the public to know about them. This is a prime example of being buried twice, pretending that there is a long history of ‘safe midwifery care’ when there was at least one high profile case of extreme negligence in the past two years. I am joining the skeptical OB in using the #notburiedtwice hashtag on twitter to make sure that these babies did not die in vain.

For those who practice outside their scope, there already are safeguards in place.

Oh really? Where were those safegaurds when I was pregnant, and my midwife lied to me about her qualifications and practices? Because I’ve tried, unsuccessfully, for over a year to get something done about the midwife I had that acted outside of her scope and abused me during my labor. If there is some resource I am missing I am very interested in hearing about it, but so far I’ve tried the owner of the birth center where the midwife worked (who blamed me for what happened), DOPL (can’t do anything about unlicensed people), the police (do not know what to charge someone with who pretends to be licensed but isn’t, do not have enough evidence to go to the DA with my other claims), Utah Midwives Organization (who I had to pester to get a response and ultimately rallied behind the midwife that abused me),  and the Midwives College of Utah (who are putting a note in that birth center’s file for later- no idea what that actually accomplishes). Nothing was done. Valerie El Halta made the ultimate mistake, one that killed someone, and she got probation and a ban from attending other births in the state. She will probably just move again to another state where midwives can get away with being unlicensed.

We are a right-to-work state and we are predominately Republican, which means we believe in limited government and in people’s right to make decisions for themselves and their families – and those include healthcare decisions.

I am pretty sure that republicans also believe that little babies should not be killed because of their parents choices, right? Or are republicans pro-choice now? Because what I see is a lot of babies being sacrificed to letting parents decide to birth out of hospital, and in fact the states with the most restrictions on home birth are predominantly republican.

Although you refuse to use your real name, I am quite certain that you were never a part of the discussions to legalize midwifery in Utah, nor have you ever been involved in lobbying. It’s evident that it is difficult for you to read and understand the Utah code but I assure you, there are consequences for those midwives who practice outside their scope.

Once again, the consequences are not named and law isn’t cited, and I have first hand experience in trying to get something done about this and there isn’t any real consequence for midwives. There just isn’t. I am eager to learn of any new avenue for getting my situation resolved.

Believe it or not, midwifery is not my primary interest in running for office. It’s education and the economy.

It should be your primary interest because the state of midwifery in Utah is appalling and you had a hand in it. Take some responsibility and pledge to fix the law. I’m not going to stop my exposure of the deplorable practices of utah midwives in response to negligence.

You all are just one more tragedy away from this whole thing blowing up again. I can wait, but I wish I didn’t have to, I wish that someone with the power to change things before they get out of hand would do so.

Holly Richardson and the “rogue” midwife

I was able to get in contact with Holly Richardson (of Holly on the Hill), who is running for house district 57 in Utah right now regarding the problems with the midwifery bill in Utah. She was instrumental in passing the bill, so I was interested in what she would want to do about the gaps that allow dangerous women like Valerie El Halta to come to Utah and practice legally. Here is the first exchange, which she deleted from her facebook page:

holly richardsonI said “What do you plan to do about negligent midwives? Your bill is what enabled killer midwife Valerie El Halta to deliver babies in utah without a license. What do you want to change about the bill to prevent another tragedy in the future?

Holly “You obviously have NO IDEA what you are talking about but thanks for your input.”

I tried to reply but she had deleted the thread already. I am not sure what she meant here, I did know what I was talking about. El Halta had her NARM certification revoked before coming to Utah, she came here because she could practice midwifery without having to obtain a license. If there had been mandatory licensing in our state she would not have come here, and would not have worked as a midwife, and would not have been given permission by the state to kill another newborn. A life might have been saved by that legislation and we now have an opportunity to maybe save someone else in the future, but Holly isn’t interested. She isn’t interested in being responsible for the legislation she pushed through in Utah and its deadly results.

I would be more willing to be charitable towards Holly Richardson if she took some responsibility for what happened, but she doesn’t. I went back to her facebook page to talk to her more because I think the public deserves answers.

holly richardson 3I ask again about what she plans to do about the bill that enabled the death of this child. She replies “Which is why I spoke to the press about the rogue midwife practicing far ouside her scope of practice”.

I point out that unlicensed midwives aren’t subject to the scope of practice standards in the direct entry midwifery act. Holly claims there are standards, “including criminal”, but I could only find two actual standards for unlicensed midwives. They can’t claim to be licensed, and they can’t carry certain drugs. The law says that doing those things is “a misdomenor”, but when I reported the midwife I used (who claimed to be licensed but was not) nothing happened. Valerie El Halta was not charged for using prescription drugs w/her patient either, so the law is not being enforced nor is it clear what misdomenor police are supposed to charge unlicensed midwives with when they violate these (weak) standards.

Unlicensed midwives can attend any kind of birth they want to, and that is the important issue that is cause for concern in utah. They can attend a footling breech birth after 4 c-sections with triplets if they want to. Nothing in law prohibits dangerous practices from midwives who aren’t licensed. Holly knows that, because her personal reaction to the newborn death was to host a meeting instructing midwives on how to lobby to keep the laws exactly the same. A baby died and her reaction was to help everyone keep things the same so that this can happen again.

I want to take a moment to address Holly Richardson’s claim that Valerie is a “rogue” midwife, because I know that isn’t true either. Holly is an administrator of the Utah Midwives Organization. When they were getting together for an annual conference a few years back they had a poll asking who should be the keynote speaker.  Check out the names suggested here: UMA keynote speaker valerie el haltaLooks like you can choose Ina May Gaskin, Valerie El Halta, or “other”. Valerie came to utah after a long history of dangerous practices and dead children, so it wasn’t some sort of secret that she behaved this way. If she was a rogue then she was one that the community completely supported and accepted (meaning, she wasn’t a rogue at all). Only when the press came asking questions did anyone pretend like this death was surprising. Holly also pretended that it was unusual for midwives to practice far outside of the scope outlined in the direct entry midwifery act, but its not. I know for a fact it is not.

Do you have a baby that is in breech position after 36 weeks gestation (which licensed midwives aren’t supposed to attend)? Don’t worry, there are unlicensed midwives willing to help you out, and your licensed midwife will pick up the phone and call her if things get dangerous and give you tips on how to avoid going to the hospital. Here is a ‘breech expert’ even (whatever that means), who delivered an almost dead baby in 2011 because midwives helped the mom avoid transfer.  It was a VBAC too. That is a combination of risk factors that no midwife should find acceptable, but more than one of them did.  There are other breech stories floating around, and that the Midwife Alliance of North America (MANA) has demonstrated that breech births have horrendously bad outcomes when attended by CPMS in out of hospital settings. There is no excuse for why this continues in our state, knowing what we do now.

UPDATE 2/24- the story I linked to above has been removed. Luckily its been screen capped and can be found here. 

Oh no, but what if you have twins or gestational diabetes? What if you have those problems and a prior c-section? Don’t worry about that either, here is a woman who will take you on as a patient even though she isn’t qualified to manage those conditions.

Here is a story about an overdue set of twins being attended to in utah by a midwife (who was likely unlicensed).

Here is another unlicensed  Utah midwife advertising her willingness to attend vbacs, twins, and breech births.

The question I have for Holly Richardson, and anyone else who thinks the midwifery act in utah is so great, is this:

Do you think that the public will stand for deaths to happen again and again? How long do you really think this will last? Wouldn’t it be better to prevent a death instead of trying to cover up the practices that led to it?

direct entry midwives: a public health menace

There is a curious overlap between anti-vaccination activists and midwives. It seems that it is hard to find a pro-vaccination midwife, despite the overwhelming scientific consensus that vaccines are a fantastic way to prevent illness. Midwives will outright tell patients anti-vax propaganda during their pregnancy- I should know, it happened to me. The midwife telling me reasons not to get a flu shot did not know that the flu is a virus instead of a bacteria, and she also believed that getting the flu shot causes the flu. I looked into the Midwives College of Utah and The Community School of Midwifery to see if midwives are actually being trained to reject vaccines or not. I could not find any vaccine specific information. But did I find an inadequate level of training for them to make any recommendations about vaccinations. The health courses that midwives take are very basic, and almost all related to birth, well woman visits, and newborns. Again, it is worth noting that when legislators ask midwives if they are practicing medicine, they vehemently claim that they are not in the business of practicing medicine. When their clients ask them questions that should be answered by a doctor, direct entry midwives claim to know what they are talking about and readily accept money for answering their questions.

Luckily I was informed enough to know that the flu shot is a good idea for a pregnant woman. What is more troubling to me is the fact that there is not any requirement for midwives, who work with a vulnerable population (newborns and pregnant women), are not required to be vaccinated against possibly fatal diseases. This is yet another gap in the Direct Entry Midwifery Act that should be bridged by new legislation.

Anti-vaccination midwives are totally at odds with the Utah Health Department’s vaccination initiative. Rates of vaccination are low in some parts of utah, and outbreaks of disease like measles and pertussis are increasing. This initiative is important and will save lives, but Utah midwives are purposely undermining this cause because of their own mistaken beliefs about vaccines. I do not think most parents who hire midwives know that they are not qualified to make a judgment for or against vaccination when they consult them. I certainly didn’t! I would not have asked if I did not think my midwife was knowledgeable about the process. This mom almost didn’t vaccinate because of the word of her midwife, so I was not the first or last person to make the mistake of asking the midwife about vaccines.

I found that the president of the Midwives College of Utah, Kristi Ridd-Young, discouraged the cancer-preventing Gardisil vaccine on her facebook page:

kristi ridd young is against vaccines

“Ughhhh! ank goodness I had a bad feeling about recommending this vaccine.” Someone (correctly) points out how there is a lot of information online about how the information Kristi linked to is not correct. Her response?

kristi ridd young is against vaccines 2

“Thanks Emily and Katy. As always, we should all be aware of all research. Sadly I now know two people personally who have experienced serious repercussions from the vaccine with no information prior to the vaccination that there was such a possibility.”

So her knowing some people with problems that she believes are caused by vaccines is enough reason for her to feel uncomfortable recommending it to people. That type of thinking privileges anecdotes over data, an obvious mistake when discussing matters of public health. Also, the nonsense about ‘no information that such a thing were possible” could be false as well. I have gotten vaccinated more than most people- I had my childhood vaccines twice because I could not obtain records and needed them to work in the medical field. The shot was cheaper than a blood test so I got everything again. I get a flu shot every year. When swine flu vaccine became available, I was the first one in line at the health department to get vaccinated. I have had gardisil and hepatitis b vaccines (three shots each). Every time I was either automatically given the CDC information sheet on vaccines or I was offered it. It is a requirement for informed consent. I am not saying that people behave perfectly or that the sheet is never forgotten, but it just seems much more likely to me that regular people likely skip reading detailed information about vaccines when they could be doing something else. It isn’t interesting to most people, and that is fine. This is also a story that cannot be verified because none of us have access to either of these people, the details can never be known.

She isn’t just against gardisil, she is against varicella (chicken pox) vaccines:

kristi ridd young is against vaccines 3

This is also a bit of nonsense that has been thoroughly debunked. There has not been a meaningful connection made between vaccination for chicken pox and shingles. There seems to be some other factor causing an increase in shingles infections that has not yet been identified.

If the president of the midwives college doesn’t know this, how can Utahans reasonably expect students to know? I would imagine that someone willing to publicly discourage vaccination would likely pass this message on to students, who in turn pass it on to their patients. The ripple effect of these damaging beliefs should not be underestimated.

I also found that the Utah Midwives Organization administrator is rabidly anti-vaccine. No one expressed disapproval of her ridiculous beliefs:

UMA admin against vaccines UMA admin against vaccines 3 UMA admin against vaccines 4 UMA admin against vaccines 5

She also seems to subscribe to the deadly belief that garlic is better than antibiotics. This belief has unfortunately cost at least one baby their life. Again, the idea that medicines and medical professionals are totally unnecessary passes without comment by the other midwives in the community

UMA admin garlic is better than antibiotics

People can believe whatever crazy thing they want to- I don’t take issue with that. What I do take issue with is midwives acting outside their expertise and scope of practice in order to spread beliefs. They have a position of authority over the clients that they serve (even if every effort is made to negate that authority, it still exists). People trust midwives to tell them reliable information about their health, and instead they are told rumors and falsehoods. Midwives are unlikely to regulate themselves, so I believe that the Utah senate should step in and do something. I will have a new page up soon about how to contact your representatives and possibly a form letter for concerned citizens.