Reconsidering the term ‘Training’: Language, professional identity, and systemic accountability in European midwifery education

Midwifery across Europe has transitioned from apprenticeship-based routes into rigorous university-level education, yet the term training continues to be widely used to describe this preparation. This commentary argues that the persistence of the term misrepresents the scientific, academic, and regulatory complexity of modern midwifery education, reinforces outdated perceptions of the profession, and risks contributing to the scapegoating of midwives amid broader systemic failures. Drawing on recent UK maternity inquiries, ongoing revisions of EU Directive 2005/36/EC, and the expanding scope of midwifery practice across the reproductive life course, this editorial highlights the need for more precise and respectful terminology to strengthen public trust, support professional identity, and inform policy development.

Language is an often-overlooked determinant of how health professions are perceived, regulated, and valued. Within midwifery, the term ‘training’ remains frequently used in public and policy discussions, despite the substantial academic, clinical, and regulatory demands now placed on pre-registration education. While seemingly benign, this terminology carries implications for how competence is judged, how responsibility is allocated, and how midwives are positioned within maternity systems. As Europe revisits key regulatory frameworks and responds to renewed concerns about maternity safety, this is an important moment to critically examine the accuracy and consequences of the language used to describe midwifery education.