CONFERENCE PROCEEDING
Midwifery in Europe: Barriers and enablers to implementing ICM standards
More details
Hide details
1
Ludwigshafen University of Business and Society, Department of Social Work and Health Care, Ludwigshafen, Germany
2
Institut für Hebammenwissenschaft und reproduktive Gesundheit, Zürcher Hochschule für Angewandte Wissenschaft, Winterthur, Switzerland
3
West Tallinn Central Hospital, Women´ś Clinic, Tallinn, Estonia
4
Mater Dei Hospital, Mater Dei Hospital, Msida, Malta
5
Nursing and Midwifery Board of Ireland, Nursing and Midwifery Board of Ireland, Ireland, Ireland
6
Diretora Clínica e Executiva, Enfermeira Parteira, Porto, Portugal
7
University of Leicester, Midwifery – School of Healthcare, Leicester, United Kingdom
8
University of Southern Denmark, Department of Public Health, Odense, Denmark
9
Ben Gurion University of the Negev, Department of Health Policy and Management, Beer-Sheva, Israel
Eur J Midwifery 2026;10(Supplement 1):A269
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND:
The International Confederation of Midwives (ICM) promotes global uptake of its standards, including the International Definition of the Midwife (ICM 2023) and the Philosophy of Midwifery Care (ICM 2023). In Europe—a region stretching from Portugal to Tajikistan comprising of 44 countries and with over six billion births annually (Database Earth)
OBJECTIVES:
To assess how midwives and midwifery associations in Europe engage with ICM’s core documents and to identify key facilitators and barriers to their implementation - especially concerning alignment with ICM’s definition and philosophy.
METHODS:
A cross-sectional online survey was conducted from December 2025-January 2026 by the ICM Europe Regional Professional Committee. A total of 95 midwives and association representatives from 19 in countries responded. Both quantitative and qualitative data were collected and thematically analysed.
RESULTS:
82% percent of respondents were affiliated with national midwifery associations. While 70% reported facilitators such as professional commitment, training access, and supportive leadership, 60% identified barriers including economic constraints, limited access to documents including language barriers, and lack of policy support. Respondents from seven countries unanimously reported full alignment with the ICM definition and philosophy. In several cases, national frameworks were narrower, more medically oriented, or inconsistent with the ICM’s model, limiting implementation potential.
CONCLUSIONS:
While European midwives firmly commit to ICM’s vision, persistent structural and systemic barriers hinder implementation. Misalignment between national definitions and ICM standards undermines midwifery autonomy, independence and continuity of care. Addressing these issues calls for targeted advocacy, structural support, and integration and cultural considerations of ICM frameworks into national policies and educational systems.
KEY MESSAGE:
To strengthen midwifery in Europe, alignment with ICM’s definition, scope, and philosophy must be prioritized through tailored implementation strategies and reinforced association capacity.
Education - digital/simulation