Skip to main content
College of Midwives Ontario logo
'

Public Consultation: Clinical Education and Student Supervision Standard

About this consultation

As part of the College’s commitment to risk-based regulation, we have developed a rigorous approach to policy making to ensure policy decisions are based on a proper evaluation of risk, solid evidence, and a thorough analysis of options and impacts. This process ensures that regulatory tools are not adopted as the default solution, but are introduced to mitigate risk when other non-regulatory options are unable to deliver the desired results.

Consultation with midwives, midwifery and regulatory organizations, and the public is an essential part of our policy development process, and in keeping with our guiding principles of accountability and transparency.

Background

While the College has a Clinical Education and Student Supervision standard in place, it was last revised in 2017 and various aspects are outdated or contain unnecessary information. The College now has an opportunity to revise the standard to ensure it reflects current and relevant content.

Our proposal

We are requesting feedback about revisions to the Clinical Education and Student Supervision Standard.

Please review:

How to provide feedback

You may submit your comments using this page.

All comments are reviewed before being posted publicly to ensure they meet the Posting Guidelines. Your name and email will not be published with your feedback, however, you will be identified as a member of the public, a midwife, or a stakeholder. Email addresses are required to ensure that each individual only provides feedback once. If you prefer to provide feedback via email, want to respond using a different format, or if you have any questions about the consultation, please email us at cmo@cmo.on.ca.

This consultation will be open until Friday, November 12, 2021.

Feedback Form

All Feedback

  1. Midwife

    The sentence near the end of page one seems grammatically awkward: …including discussing the extent…and record informed choice discussions….

    I think “record” should be changed to “recording”

    Otherwise no other comments.

    • Are you a: Midwife
    • Organization: Community midwives of thunder bay
    • On behalf of: Yourself
  2. Member of the public

    The new standard seems much less detailed. For example, allowing students in MNP and Clerkship to be a second midwife at a hospital birth is now not specified. Additionally, the details of allowing senior students to attend some postpartum visits under indirect supervision is removed in the updated versions. Will these no longer be permitted? Or will it be the role of the MEP to create those standards?

    I believe it should also be mandatory for those who are preceptors to take a course from the MEP about being a preceptor, expectations for them and for their student. Many students are not treated fairly or equitably by their preceptors, which leads to trauma and burnout before they even begin their career. A midwife should be a preceptor because they have an interest in teaching/guiding a student to learn, not because it a requirement placed on them by their practice.

    • Are you a: Member of the public
    • On behalf of: Yourself
  3. Midwife

    I believe this standard to be very reasonable, however I am concerned about the reality where some preceptors will delegate postpartum visits inappropriately. It’s already a reality with the current standard and there seems to be a great reluctance on the part of the college to actually act on complaints made when midwives behave inappropriately.

    • Are you a: Midwife
    • Organization: n/a
    • On behalf of: Yourself
  4. Midwife

    The standard appears appropriate in terms of setting out what should be the expectations of a Registered Midwife from her regulatory college. It’s not clear to me that professional conduct would be considered in determining whether a midwife should be a preceptor and I think that is something that should be considered. Part of what we are expected to teach students is ethics, appropriate business practices, healthy interprofessional and intraprofessional relationships and a midwife who has not developed that skill set themselves should not be either teaching a learner how to do so, or worse inflicting those poor skills on a learner. I’m not as clear if that is the regulatory body’s responsibility to manage or that of the Education Program? In the same way, in determining what level of supervision is appropriate for a learner, is the notion that the Education Program will continue to provide guidance around the level of supervision for the various placements? If so, then I think it’s appropriate to remove those details from the CMO’s responsibility.

    • Are you a: Midwife
    • On behalf of: Yourself
  5. Midwife

    I approve of the new standard as it keeps the the role of the regulatory body and does not micro-manage the role of the MEP. The previous detail about attendance at births and PP visits is duplicated in MEP policies, where it belongs, not in a CMO standard.
    I like the addition of the responsibilities of preceptors in detail.

    • Are you a: Midwife
    • Organization: Laurentian University
    • On behalf of: Organization
  6. Member of the public

    I appreciate that the proposed standard is much less prescriptive about what a preceptor can allow a student to do without direct supervision. I assume that the guidelines on what students are / are not allowed to do is actually covered by the MEP rather than the CMO, which is, in my opinion, the correct entity to prescribe what students can do.

    Like another commenter, I believe that student evaulations of preceptors should have some bearing on whether or not they can continue as preceptors, but believe that the more appropriate entity for handling that is the MEPs rather than the CMO unless it is a professional conduct issue.

    • Are you a: Member of the public
    • On behalf of: Yourself
  7. Midwife

    I support the changes made in this standard around expectations of preceptors. I think a preceptor must not have conditions on their practice to supervise a student. I would like to keep the rules around what a student can do independently at what level as it protects students from being “abused” for the purpose of doing visits and also protects students from doing work without a midwife on-site that they are not ready for.

    • Are you a: Midwife
    • Organization: Ottawa Valley Midwives
    • On behalf of: Yourself
  8. Midwife

    Student should not be sent to placement before meeting a minimal level of clinical knowledge.
    Midwives should have more experience before being allowed to mentor a student.
    An GR in their second year of practice should not be mentoring student

    • Are you a: Midwife
    • Organization: Osm
    • On behalf of: Organization
  9. Midwife

    New proposal reflects the role of the preceptor student and client relations accurately.

    • Are you a: Midwife
    • Organization: Blue Heron Midwives
    • On behalf of: Yourself
  10. Midwife

    This method is standard

    • Are you a: Midwife
    • Organization: St philomena Catholic hospital
    • On behalf of: Yourself
  11. Midwife

    I think that it is both reasonable and advisable for the requirements for preceptors to be included in the policy. I also think that student evaluation of preceptors should play a part in whether preceptors continue to have students.
    I do think that the specifics of what students are allowed to do (in C&C, MNP and clerkship) being written in policy provides some much needed consistency between students at different locations in the same placement

    • Are you a: Midwife
    • Organization: Huron midwives
    • On behalf of: Yourself
  12. Midwife

    Seems like a positive change, putting the onus on the clerking midwifery individual rather than the midwife preceptor.

    I do take issue with the word “student” for the IMPP. People in the IMPP are already trained and have met standards from their country of origin. They are being assessed as competent and receiving guidance on navigating the unnecessarily complicated Ontario system. It was insulting to be called a “student” having successfully graduated with a Bachelors with honours and worked for 10yrs to be called a “student”

    Consider consulting with the IMPP program director for a less offensive term to call internationally trained midwives completing their assessments of competency.

    • Are you a: Midwife
    • Organization: N/A
    • On behalf of: Yourself
  13. Midwife

    Clear, concise and achievable. I appreciate the additional statements, that a NR should not be supervising a student..

    • Are you a: Midwife
    • Organization: Markham Stouffville Midwives
    • On behalf of: Yourself