In February 2026, BCCNM surveyed midwives to better understand views on intrapartum care standards and currency requirements, including role‑specific certification requirements, Neonatal Resuscitation Program (NRP) recertification cadence, mentorship for new registrants, and how competence is verified in hospital and home/community settings.
This survey is part of BCCNM's ongoing review of intrapartum care and currency requirements and is intended to clarify expectations to reflect the realities of practice and promote safe, equitable care. We thank the 100+ registrants who completed the survey and shared their thoughts.
What we heard
- Certification expectations can be role‑specific: Certification expectations varied by role according to survey respondents. Respondents indicated that certification requirements should align with the scope of practice associated with different roles:
- Full scope/intrapartum roles: Respondents commonly identified Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR), Neonatal Resuscitation Program (NRP), Fetal Health Surveillance (FHS), and obstetrical emergency skills as core certifications.
- Antenatal-only roles: Respondents most often identified CPR and FHS as relevant, with limited support for requiring NRP.
- Postpartum-only roles: Respondents generally identified CPR and NRP as important certifications, while FHS was viewed as less relevant.
- Non-clinical roles: Respondents generally did not identify clinical certifications as necessary.
- NRP recertification should be context‑driven: Many respondents indicated that recertification once every two years aligns with the validity of the NRP certification and reflects current practice. However, annual recertification was often recommended as the preferred frequency for those providing intrapartum care, particularly in home or community settings where team resources may be limited. For non-clinical roles or during periods of leave, respondents generally favoured an as-needed or return-to-practice model rather than routine recertification.
- Mentorship is essential, with flexible delivery. Respondents strongly supported structured mentorship for new licensees within established practices with round-the-clock support. Opinions varied on strict continuity-of-care counts and “no solo" rules; many preferred risk-based approaches, remote or cross-practice options, and mentor compensation. Some warned that rigid requirements could hinder rural and Indigenous midwifery practice.
- Competence over quotas. Respondents generally preferred competence-based approaches to maintaining intrapartum readiness rather than fixed minimum case numbers. Suggested approaches included self-assessment combined with targeted education or supervised practice. When case numbers were used, respondents favoured tracking experience over multiple years rather than applying annual quotas. In community settings, transfers from home to hospital were also identified as valuable experiences that contribute to maintaining clinical competence.
What happens next
Insights from the survey will help inform BCCNM's ongoing policy discussions related to certification expectations, learning supports, and approaches to maintaining competence.