AB 1696 clarifies nurse-midwife authority in obstetric emergency settings
Oct 4, 2026 edition · GC-2026-0219 · Published 2026-10-04 · Version 2 · Final
AB 1696 clarifies when California emergency-care provisions do not require physician supervision of a licensed nurse-midwife. The final law identifies obstetric settings and requested consultations while preserving the practitioner’s existing scope and the emergency-care framework.
What happened
California enacted AB 1696 on September 27, amending Health and Safety Code sections 1317.1 and 1317.10. Section 1317.1 generally defines emergency services and care through medical screening, examination and evaluation by physicians or other appropriate licensed persons under physician supervision, with treatment within the person’s license and the facility’s capability. The new subdivision (n) states that the section does not require physician supervision of a licensed nurse-midwife in a labor and delivery unit, obstetric triage or dedicated emergency obstetric evaluation unit when the care is authorized by and consistent with Business and Professions Code section 2746.5. It also addresses a nurse-midwife specifically requested by the treating physician to provide obstetric consultation. The enactment is the event reported here; the applicable commencement of these provisions must be confirmed separately.
The amendment operates notwithstanding the listed supervision language in the emergency-care, consultation and stabilization provisions; it does not expand the scope of licensure. Section 1317.1 continues to preserve restrictions on transfers or admissions that conflict with the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act or federal emergency-treatment law. The bill adds parallel nurse-midwife supervision language to section 1317.10, the specific arrangement under which Stanford Hospital and Clinics and Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital may be treated as one licensed facility for active-labor emergency care. That arrangement retains its conditions, including a safe transfer determination and the patient’s right to refuse transfer.
Scope and timing
- Authority status
- Final
- Applicability
- Potentially applicable
- Audience
- Health systems, Provider networks, Health-tech
- Jurisdiction
- California
Why it matters
An obstetric service can misstate the change if it treats every emergency-department assignment as covered or assumes that the amendment creates new clinical privileges. The relevant setting, authorized midwifery scope and requested consultation pathway determine how the clarification fits a hospital’s actual staffing model.
Recommended action
Confirm the applicable commencement before treating the new provisions as current duties. Prepare the following for implementation at that commencement: Have obstetric leadership and counsel compare staffing protocols with the specified settings and consultation route. Confirm each practitioner’s license scope, clinical privileges and escalation arrangements before revising supervision requirements. Keep safe transfer, emergency treatment and patient refusal procedures in the review.
Sources
- AB1696 enacted final textOfficial · California Legislature · 2026-09-27 · Source review 2026-10-05
Complete edition and supplemental material
This finding in the complete approved report →Regulatory horizons, CIA trends and implementation trackers remain in the full report.
Read the entire Compliance Sweep report →