Midwives Challenge Georgia’s Restrictive Laws in Landmark Lawsuit Amidst Maternal Health Crisis

ATLANTA, GA – April 2, 2026 – In a significant legal challenge aimed at expanding access to maternal care, several midwives, represented by the Center for Reproductive Rights, today filed a lawsuit against the State of Georgia. The legal action targets some of the nation’s most restrictive midwifery laws, which plaintiffs argue severely limit their ability to practice and exacerbate Georgia’s already critical maternal health crisis. The announcement was made during a press conference held at the Georgia State Capitol, strategically timed on the final day of the state’s legislative session, following the failure of House Bill 520, a bill that sought to largely decriminalize midwifery.

The lawsuit, formally known as Amani v. State of Georgia, directly confronts a legal framework that prohibits midwives with expertise in home and birth center births from practicing independently and restricts certified nurse midwives (CNMs) from operating at the full scope of their extensive training. These legislative barriers, critics contend, contribute directly to the dire maternal mortality rates in Georgia and across the United States, particularly impacting Black women and underserved communities.

Background: A Deepening Maternal Health Crisis

The United States is grappling with an unprecedented maternal health crisis, characterized by alarmingly high rates of maternal mortality compared to other high-income nations. The statistics are particularly stark for Black women, who experience maternal mortality at a rate significantly higher than their white counterparts. This crisis is compounded by a shrinking landscape of maternity care providers. In recent years, numerous hospital labor and delivery units and freestanding birth centers have shuttered their doors, creating vast "maternity care deserts" across the country. According to federal data, more than one-third of U.S. counties are now considered maternity care deserts, lacking any birthing facility or obstetric clinician.

Georgia, a state with some of the most restrictive midwifery laws in the nation, mirrors these grim national trends. In February of this year, Georgia’s oldest freestanding birth center, the Savannah Birth Center, was forced to close, leaving only three such facilities in the entire state. As of August 2025, data indicated that a mere 36% of Georgia’s rural hospitals were still offering labor and delivery services, further diminishing options for pregnant individuals, especially those in rural areas.

The Legal Challenge: Dismantling Barriers to Midwifery Care

The lawsuit specifically challenges several key provisions within Georgia law that create insurmountable hurdles for midwives. These include prohibitions against midwives practicing without physician supervision in certain settings, requirements for exorbitant fees to be paid to physicians for "supervision" that often amounts to little more than oversight, and restrictions on the types of birth settings where midwives can practice.

"It should not be illegal to give birth at home with a midwife," declared Jamarah Amani, a Florida-licensed midwife and co-founder of the National Black Midwives Alliance, one of the plaintiffs in the case. "Every pregnant person should be able to choose where they give birth and with whom. I was inspired to become a midwife after my own distressing birth experience in Georgia, where hospital staff would not let me give birth in the way I wanted – an all-too-common experience, especially for Black women. I trained in the tradition of legendary grand midwives who have helped Georgians give birth for generations. But because of Georgia law, I had to move to Florida to get my midwifery license and build my career. We’re bringing this case to get rid of these oppressive laws so I can serve families in Georgia, too."

Amani’s experience highlights the profound personal and professional impact of Georgia’s restrictive laws. Her inability to practice her chosen profession in her home state, despite extensive training and a deep commitment to serving her community, underscores the urgency of the legal challenge.

Tamara Taitt, a Florida-licensed midwife and executive director of the Atlanta Birth Center, echoed these sentiments. "Georgia has a maternity care crisis, and the state continues to squander a workforce that could help change that," Taitt stated. "Currently, there are not enough maternal health care providers in Georgia. The solution is more midwives, and lawmakers need to let us practice. As the U.S. continues to fall behind in maternal mortality and morbidity, the rest of the world employs the solution: more midwives. As a country and as a state, we are visibly failing pregnant people – especially Black women, rural families, and communities of color."

Taitt’s inability to practice midwifery at the Atlanta Birth Center, where she serves as executive director, further illustrates the direct consequences of these restrictive laws. The center, a vital resource for many families, is hindered by regulations that prevent experienced midwives from fully contributing to its services.

Sarah Stokely, a Certified Nurse Midwife (CNM) who resides in Georgia but currently practices at a home birth practice in Tennessee, shared her frustration. "As a Georgia native, I want to use my midwifery license and skills to help families in my own state," Stokely said. "But because of Georgia laws, I have to drive to Tennessee to practice my profession. In Georgia, I would need to pay a physician an insurmountable fee to babysit me. Many clients come to me because they’ve had traumatic hospital births, with procedures forced upon them. Our current medical system is not meeting the needs of pregnant people, and they deserve options. Midwives prioritize providing more personalized care and listening to the needs of our clients. We also know when to pull in a physician if certain risks arise."

Stokely’s situation exemplifies the "brain drain" of maternal health professionals from states with restrictive laws. Her ability to serve Georgia families is contingent on her commute to a neighboring state, a logistical and personal burden that highlights the inefficiencies and harms of the current legal framework.

The Promise of Midwifery Care: Evidence-Based Outcomes

Extensive research consistently demonstrates that increased access to midwifery care leads to significantly improved health outcomes for both pregnant individuals and newborns. This benefit is particularly pronounced for people of color and those with lower incomes. Midwife-led care is associated with lower rates of costly and potentially complications-prone pregnancy interventions, including Cesarean sections, episiotomies, epidural anesthesia, and medically induced labor.

A comprehensive review published in the National Library of Medicine (PMC9677161) underscores these findings, highlighting the effectiveness of midwifery models of care in diverse populations. The evidence suggests that when midwives are allowed to practice to the full extent of their education and training, health systems become more equitable and efficient.

A National Trend of Legal Challenges and Progress

The lawsuit in Georgia is not an isolated event. It is part of a growing national movement challenging restrictive midwifery laws and advocating for expanded access to care. Similar legal actions have been filed recently in Mississippi, Nebraska, and Alabama, all seeking to dismantle barriers that impede midwives and birth centers from serving their communities.

In North Carolina, a significant legislative shift is set to take effect this fall, with certified nurse midwives no longer being required to enter into agreements with physicians. This move signals a broader recognition of the autonomy and expertise of nurse midwives.

Furthermore, the Center for Reproductive Rights has a proven track record of success in advocating for midwifery access. Following a 2024 lawsuit filed by the Center challenging Hawaii’s restrictions on traditional and apprenticeship-trained midwives, the state successfully expanded access to midwifery care, demonstrating that legal advocacy can lead to tangible improvements in maternal healthcare.

Nancy Northup, President of the Center for Reproductive Rights, emphasized the critical role of midwives in addressing the current crisis. "We cannot solve the maternal health crisis without midwives – they are a key part of the solution in Georgia and nationwide. Yet, under Georgia law, midwives are treated like criminals," Northup stated. "These extreme restrictions are exacerbating the maternity care crisis and infringing on the rights of pregnant women who want to give birth with midwives. We are suing the state because pregnant people should have the autonomy to decide who they give birth with, and taking away options while there is a glaring lack of providers is senseless. We must break down these legal barriers to improve maternal health care in this country."

The Broader Implications

The lawsuit filed today in Georgia carries significant implications for maternal healthcare access not only within the state but also as a potential catalyst for broader legal reform across the nation. By challenging deeply entrenched regulations, the plaintiffs and their legal counsel are aiming to:

• Increase Access to Care: The primary goal is to ensure that pregnant individuals in Georgia have more choices for safe and personalized maternity care, particularly in areas with limited access to obstetric providers.
• Address Health Disparities: The case directly confronts laws that disproportionately affect Black women and other marginalized communities, aiming to reduce racial and socioeconomic disparities in maternal health outcomes.
• Promote Midwifery as a Solution: The lawsuit seeks to legitimize and expand the role of midwives as essential healthcare providers, leveraging their proven ability to improve outcomes and reduce healthcare costs.
• Uphold Bodily Autonomy: The legal challenge frames the issue as one of reproductive justice and bodily autonomy, asserting the right of individuals to make informed decisions about their pregnancies and births.

The legal teams representing the plaintiffs include the Center for Reproductive Rights, Covington & Burling LLP, and Mitchell Shapiro Greenamyre & Funt LLP. Their collective expertise and dedication to this cause are expected to drive a robust legal battle aimed at achieving meaningful reform in Georgia’s approach to maternal healthcare. The outcome of Amani v. State of Georgia could set a precedent for how other states address similar legislative barriers to essential healthcare services.

Media Resources:

Photos and footage from the press conference held in front of the Georgia State Capitol are available for media use.

Media Contact:

[email protected]