US dataswitch to UK
Nurse Midwives
providing prenatal, intrapartum, postpartum or newborn care to patients, ordering and interpreting diagnostic or laboratory tests and initiating emergency interventions to stabilize patients. If that's your week, this page is about your job.
The honest answer
AI is already taking a real slice of the routine work here: writing information in medical records or providing narrative summaries to communicate patient information to other health care providers. That is a slice of tasks, not of you.
That slice is not coming back; the core of the job, providing prenatal, intrapartum, postpartum or newborn care to patients, stays yours. The tools change hands, the accountability doesn't.
Your week, as this page understands it
Diagnose and coordinate all aspects of the birthing process, either independently or as part of a healthcare team. May provide well-woman gynecological care. Must have specialized, graduate nursing education. The job title says “nurse midwives”. The real job is the part underneath: providing prenatal, intrapartum, postpartum or newborn care to patients. That is the thing someone has to be right about.
The exposed part of this job is specific, and we won’t pretend it is coming back. But nurse midwives is not one task. It is 21 scored ones, and they are nowhere near equally exposed. The most durable of them, on this evidence, is providing prenatal, intrapartum, postpartum or newborn care to patients, and the ledger below shows exactly why.
Where the work sits, by task weight
- shifting to AI
- 19%
- changing shape
- 18%
- staying human
- 62%
These bars are tasks changing hands, not people being counted out. The ledger below shows which.
Whole-job exposure score 29 out of 100 (25–34 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, across 21 scored tasks. The number is the support for the sentence above it, not a headline about anyone’s future.
How we know this
What is measured: Every published task statement for nurse midwives is rated on five dimensions: can a model produce the output, does the work need a body in a room, does it need a legally accountable person, does it depend on a person being trusted in the moment, and how much data exists. A published formula turns those five ratings into the score; the model never writes the number.
How the bar is built: Each task’s share of the bar is its published importance weight, so a task you do all day counts for more than one you do twice a year.
Release: 2026-q4.1, scores computed 2026-08-05. Read the full method.
Your job, task by task
These are the official task statements for this occupation, in plain English, sorted by what the evidence says is happening to each one. The official wording sits under every line so you can check the rewrite against it.
- Task clusters are not derived in this release, so the task-cluster field is empty and no Collab365 Space routing is attached to this occupation yet.
Shifting to AI
4 tasksTasks today’s tools can already do most of. This is the part we will not soften: where these rows are the bulk of your week, the week changes.
Documenting patients' health histories, symptoms, physical conditions or other diagnostic information
This is reading one thing and writing another: patients' health histories, symptoms in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Document patients' health histories, symptoms, physical conditions, or other diagnostic information.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 61 out of 100 (57–65 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Writing up histories and symptoms is note-taking that dictation and drafting tools already do well.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Writing information in medical records or providing narrative summaries to communicate patient information to other health care providers
This is reading one thing and writing another: information in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Write information in medical records or provide narrative summaries to communicate patient information to other health care providers.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 81 out of 100 (77–85 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Summarizing a patient’s record for other clinicians is drafting from notes, which software does well.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 4/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Reading current literature
This is reading one thing and writing another: current literature in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Read current literature, talk with colleagues, or participate in professional organizations or conferences to keep abreast of developments in midwifery.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 70 out of 100 (66–74 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Keeping up with the literature is reading and summarizing, something software does quickly.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 4/4.
Establishing practice guidelines for specialty areas
This is reading one thing and writing another: practice guidelines in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Establish practice guidelines for specialty areas such as primary health care of women, care of the childbearing family, and newborn care.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 62 out of 100 (55–69 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Practice guidelines are built from published evidence, so software can produce a strong working draft.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 4/4.
Changing shape
4 tasksTasks where the machine takes the producing and a person keeps the checking, the deciding, or the answering-for-it. For most jobs this is the biggest group, and it is where "transformation, not termination" is literally visible.
Ordering and interpreting diagnostic or laboratory tests
The software now makes the first pass at diagnostic, but someone has to be answerable for the result, and it cannot be the software. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Order and interpret diagnostic or laboratory tests.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 47 out of 100 (40–54 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Test choice and interpretation follow clear guidelines, yet a licensed clinician must order and act on them.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Documenting findings of physical examinations
The software now makes the first pass at findings of physical examinations, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Document findings of physical examinations.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 49 out of 100 (42–56 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Writing up examination findings is structured clinical note-taking software supports well.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Consulting with or referring patients to appropriate specialists when conditions exceed the scope of practice or expertise
The software now makes the first pass at or referring patients, but someone has to be answerable for the result, and it cannot be the software. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Consult with or refer patients to appropriate specialists when conditions exceed the scope of practice or expertise.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 40 out of 100 (33–47 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Referral criteria are documented, but the licensed clinician makes and owns the call.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Staying human
13 tasksTasks that stay with a person, because they happen in the physical world, because the rules need someone accountable, or because the value is that a specific person does them.
Providing prenatal, intrapartum, postpartum or newborn care to patients
This work happens in the physical world: prenatal, intrapartum, postpartum or newborn care, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Provide prenatal, intrapartum, postpartum, or newborn care to patients.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Caring for a mother and newborn is physically being with them.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Monitoring fetal development by listening to fetal heartbeat
This work happens in the physical world: fetal development, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Monitor fetal development by listening to fetal heartbeat, taking external uterine measurements, identifying fetal position, or estimating fetal size and weight.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Listening to a heartbeat and feeling the baby’s position needs hands on the mother.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Providing patients with direct family planning services
This work happens in the physical world: patients, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Provide patients with direct family planning services, such as inserting intrauterine devices, dispensing oral contraceptives, and fitting cervical barriers, including cervical caps or diaphragms.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Fitting devices and barriers is a physical clinical procedure.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Show the other 11 tasks
Planning, providing or evaluating educational programs for nursing staff, health care teams or the community
changing shapeThe software now makes the first pass at educational programs, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Plan, provide, or evaluate educational programs for nursing staff, health care teams, or the community.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 42 out of 100 (35–49 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Course materials draft well, but running the sessions needs someone in front of the group.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Conducting clinical research on topics
staying humanThe ratings behind this row put clinical research well outside what today's tools can do on their own.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Conduct clinical research on topics such as maternal or infant health care, contraceptive methods, breastfeeding, and gynecological care.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 38 out of 100 (31–45 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Research design and analysis are well documented, though the study itself needs patients and approvals.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Educating patients and family members regarding prenatal
staying humanThe value here is that a specific person handles patients and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Educate patients and family members regarding prenatal, intrapartum, postpartum, newborn, or interconception care.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 30 out of 100 (23–37 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Good material exists, but parents act on advice from a midwife they have come to trust.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 4/4.
Prescribing medications as permitted by state regulations
staying humanThe rules require a named, qualified person to answer for medications, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Prescribe medications as permitted by state regulations.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 24 out of 100 (20–28 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Only a licensed prescriber may issue a prescription, whatever software suggests.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 4/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Developing and implementing individualized plans for health care management
staying humanThe rules require a named, qualified person to answer for individualized plans, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Develop and implement individualized plans for health care management.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 23 out of 100 (16–30 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Care plans draw on published guidelines, but a licensed clinician must set and own them.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Explaining procedures to patients, family members, staff members
staying humanThe value here is that a specific person handles procedures and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Explain procedures to patients, family members, staff members or others.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 21 out of 100 (14–28 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Explanations can be drafted, but patients take reassurance from the midwife in front of them.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Instructing student nurse midwives, medical students or residents on the birthing process
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: student nurse midwives, medical students or residents, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Instruct student nurse midwives, medical students, or residents on the birthing process.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 18 out of 100 (11–25 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Teaching birth care to students means supervising them with real patients.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 2/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Managing newborn care during the first weeks of life
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: newborn care during the first weeks of life, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 3 · SupplementalSource: “Manage newborn care during the first weeks of life.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 4 out of 100 (0–11 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Newborn care in the first weeks means weighing, examining and watching the baby in person.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Performing physical examinations by taking vital signs
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: physical examinations, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Perform physical examinations by taking vital signs, checking neurological reflexes, examining breasts, or performing pelvic examinations.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: A physical examination needs the clinician’s hands on the patient.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Initiating emergency interventions to stabilize patients
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: emergency interventions, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Initiate emergency interventions to stabilize patients.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Stabilizing a patient in an emergency is hands-on care.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Providing primary health care, including pregnancy and childbirth, to women
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: primary health care, including pregnancy and childbirth, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Provide primary health care, including pregnancy and childbirth, to women.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 0 out of 100 (0–4 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Primary care through pregnancy and birth is delivered in person.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 0/4 · needs a body in a room 4/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
What this job pays, and how many people do it
- Median pay
- $134,040a year, the middle of the range, so half earn more and half earn less.bls-oews, 2025 · May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)
How we know this
Source: bls-oews
Reference period: May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)
Rounding: Shown as published.
- People doing this job
- 7,920in the US, 2025.bls-oews · May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)
What is deliberately not here: a forecast of how many of these jobs exist in ten years. Where an official projection exists for a market we publish it with its vintage; where it does not, we leave the space empty rather than borrow the other country’s number.
Why this is shifting
The reason is boringly specific. Most of what is shifting here is reading one thing and writing another: patients' health histories, symptoms in, a record out. The rows above are exactly that shape: writing information in medical records or providing narrative summaries to communicate patient information to other health care providers and documenting patients' health histories, symptoms, physical conditions or other diagnostic information. What it cannot do is be there in the room, and that is still where prenatal, intrapartum, postpartum or newborn care get done. Which is why this page talks about your tasks changing, not your job ending.
Your move
Over a pint: what I’d tell you if you were my friend
Start with what does not change: providing prenatal, intrapartum, postpartum or newborn care to patients is the middle of this job, and the evidence on this page says it stays with a person.
So, given all that: 19% of this job's task weight sits in rows the software is already learning, 18% in rows that change shape rather than disappear, and 62% in rows it is nowhere near. That is the position, measured across 21 scored tasks. It is not a forecast about you.
So the thing worth your attention is not the job going away. It is the layer around it. Writing information in medical records or providing narrative summaries to communicate patient information to other health care providers is the part turning into software, and being the person who understands that layer is worth money.
This week: one thing
Ask the one question. Find whoever is bringing new software into your workplace (the manager, the office, whoever runs the system) and ask them what it is meant to do to patients' health histories, symptoms, and what it is not meant to touch. Ten minutes, this week, before anyone decides it for you.
- What you end up holding
- a straight answer about what is actually being rolled out, and when
- How long it takes
- ten minutes
If there’s nobody obvious to ask, or you’d rather not ask your manager: Put the same question to your union rep, your shift lead or the person who has been there longest, in person, over a break. Same ten minutes, same answer, and you will usually get a straighter one. Write down what they say. The note is the artifact, and it tells you whether prenatal, intrapartum, postpartum or newborn care are in scope or not. Nothing to log into, no license needed.
Over the next 90 days
Get inside the tool rollout rather than waiting for it. Over the next ninety days, ask to be in the group that tests, checks or signs off whatever new system arrives near ordering and interpreting diagnostic or laboratory tests. It is usually an unglamorous seat that nobody fights for, and it is the one that decides how the software is used on your job rather than to it.
Over the next 12 months
On this evidence I would not retrain out of this job, and I will say that plainly rather than hedge it. The task list here is dominated by work that stays with a person. What I would do with a year is get formally recognised for the layer around it (the systems, the compliance, the planning), so you are the one who understands the software instead of the one it is done to. Before you pay for anything, use CareerOneStop - Find local training. It is free, it is the Labor Department's own service, and it is listed below with the rest of the free routes.
The roads out of here, and why I am not sending you down them
I looked at the obvious moves out of this job, and here is what I found.
I checked the 12 nearest US occupations to nurse midwives (nearest by the work that AI is not taking, not by job title), and none of them survived. The closest was nurse practitioners: only about 11% of its durable work is work you already do. And on the numbers you do not need one. This job scores 29/100 here, with only 19% of the task list in the top band, and “provide prenatal, intrapartum, postpartum, or newborn care to patients” is not work that hands over cleanly. None of them beats deepening what you already have.
How that was checked: this job was compared against all 830 US occupations in this release on their official task statements, and the 12 nearest were examined one by one. A move that turns on an industry, an employer or a qualification rather than on the work itself will not show up in a check like that. And this release carries no licence register, so anything you are weighing needs that looked up separately.
3 moves I checked and rejected
These are the obvious-looking jumps. They are here with their reasons rather than quietly dropped, because the ones that fail are worth knowing about. It is one less thing to turn over at night.
Nurse Practitioners
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already document patients' health histories, symptoms, physical conditions, or other diagnostic information, and their equivalent is to analyze and interpret patients' histories, symptoms, physical findings, or diagnostic information to develop…. Across both published task lists that is about 11% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: You would be starting most of it from nothing: about 11% of the durable work in that job is work you do today, and the rest you would be learning while the bills carried on.
Emergency Medicine Physicians
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already initiate emergency interventions to stabilize patients, and their equivalent is to stabilize patients in critical condition. Across both published task lists that is about 9% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 9% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step. The pay gap is the market pricing a barrier: $335,550 against your $134,040 is 2.50× (OEWS May 2025 (both)), and you would be crossing it holding about 9% of their durable work. A gap that size with an overlap that small is a wish, not a route.
Healthcare Diagnosing or Treating Practitioners, All Other
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already document patients' health histories, symptoms, physical conditions, or other diagnostic information, and their equivalent is to interview patients to document symptoms and health histories. Across both published task lists that is about 9% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 9% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step. It is a pay cut, in those words: $115,210 against your $134,040, 14.0% less (OEWS May 2025 (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice.
What I’d stop worrying about
A friend tells you what not to spend fear on. This is that list.
The headline number you read somewhere
The big “X% of jobs” figures are about the whole economy, not about you. The number that describes your job is on this page: 19% of its task weight, across 21 scored tasks. Every row behind it is printed above with the source. Check ours; ignore theirs.
The headlines about your trade disappearing
They are usually about the technology, not the timetable. Changes to work like providing prenatal, intrapartum, postpartum or newborn care to patients arrive through rules, insurance and money, slowly and visibly. This page tracks the task evidence and will move when it moves.
Retraining out of a job that is holding up
On this evidence I would not spend money leaving. Spend it on the layer around the job instead: the tools, the paperwork, the planning. That is where the change actually is.
The “obvious” next job everyone suggests
I checked the obvious moves and most of them did not survive. The reasons are printed with the routes above, including the pay and the gate. A move that fails on the numbers is worth knowing about so you can stop turning it over at night.
You are reading the United States figures
The United Kingdom splits this work across more than one official group, of which Midwifery nurses is the closest. The pay and employment figures are not directly comparable, and we do not average them together.
Switch to the United Kingdom page →partial match
In UK official statistics this job is counted as Midwifery nurses. Pay and employment stay on this page’s own group; the task list and the scores do not cross over.
Your route through this
Where to go next, and what it costs
Free, and complete
The moves above cost nothing. These are the real services that go with them: public, government-funded, and free at the point of use. Nothing on this page is behind an email address or a payment.
Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop - Find local training
Search what's running near you, from the Labor Department's own database, before anyone sells you a course.
Free to search; individual programs vary, and some are funded
Anywhere in the US:
An American Job Center will sit down with you for free. Find yours by ZIP code.
Free
Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop - Licensed occupations finder
Check what your state actually requires before you pay for anything.
Free
Anywhere in the US:
Free
No Space for this job, but one for what is happening to it
Nothing Collab365 runs is built for nurse midwives, and we are not going to point you at the nearest one and call it a fit.
There is one that is not about a job title at all. The AI Authority is about being the person who directs these tools at work rather than the person they get compared to. That is worth saying here, because 19% of the work on this page is already inside what they can do.
7 days free, no card needed. Explore up to 2 Spaces before you choose a plan: you pick a plan later, not now.
The AI Authority is a general community about working with AI, not a course for nurse midwives. You do not need it to act on anything here: the moves above cost nothing and stand on their own. The data on this page is the same either way.
Noted, and thank you. We’ll email you if a Space for nurse midwives launches. Nothing else.
That did not look like an email address, so nothing was saved. Have another go below.
We could not save that. The fault is ours, not yours, and your address was not stored. Please try again later.
No deadline on any of this. The page will still be here, and the data is refreshed on a published schedule rather than when someone wants a headline.
Questions people ask about this job
- Will AI replace Nurse Midwives?
- Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 21 official task statements scored for Nurse Midwives (United States, SOC 29-1161), 19% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 29 out of 100 (range 25–34, band: low). That is a statement about tasks, not about headcount: this measures what AI could do, not whether any employer adopts it, whether the law allows it, or whether doing the routine parts faster creates more demand for the human parts. Figures are from release 2026-q4.1.
- Which tasks in “Nurse Midwives” can AI already do?
- The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Write information in medical records or provide narrative summaries to communicate patient information to other health care providers” (81/100, very high); “Read current literature, talk with colleagues, or participate in professional organizations or conferences to keep abreast of developments in midwifery” (70/100, high); “Establish practice guidelines for specialty areas such as primary health care of women, care of the childbearing family, and newborn care” (62/100, high). Each score comes from five published 0–4 ratings turned into a number by a published formula, and each carries the model's one-sentence reason on the page.
- Which tasks in “Nurse Midwives” stay human?
- About 62% of this job's task weight sits in work that scores low for AI exposure. The lowest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Provide patients with direct family planning services, such as inserting intrauterine devices, dispensing oral contraceptives, and fitting cervical barriers,…” (0/100, minimal); “Provide primary health care, including pregnancy and childbirth, to women” (0/100, minimal); “Initiate emergency interventions to stabilize patients” (0/100, minimal). Low scores usually mean the task needs a body in a room, a legally accountable human, or trust built in real time. Those are the three things the scoring rubric treats as gates rather than obstacles.
- What should someone working in “Nurse Midwives” do about AI?
- Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 19% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 62% is not. The practical move is to spend more of your week on the tasks that score low, the ones above, and to get fluent at directing AI through the tasks that score high, because those are the parts that change whether or not you are ready for them. This page does not predict your job, and nothing here is career advice tailored to you: the score describes the occupation, not the person.
- How is the AI exposure score for Nurse Midwives calculated?
- Each official task statement for the occupation is rated on five published 0–4 dimensions (output replicability, physical embodiment, licensed accountability, real-time human trust, and data availability) by claude-opus-5 using scoring prompt task_scoring_v1.0. The model never writes the score; a published formula turns the five ratings into a 0–100 number, so every score can be recomputed by hand. The occupation figure is the importance-weighted mean across 21 scored tasks. The prompt, the rubric, the formula and the full dataset are published at https://futureproof.collab365.com/method and https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1 under CC BY 4.0.
Where these numbers come from
Worth knowing about these figures
- The match between this job and its counterpart in the other country is partial, so the two pages count slightly different groups of people.
- Task clusters are not derived in this release, so the task-cluster field is empty and no Collab365 Space routing is attached to this occupation yet.
- Task statements
- onet-dbProcessing: catalogue-bridge → onet-im-rt-weighting → task-scoring → score-aggregation
- Task weights
- onet-db (im-rt)
- Scores
- Rubric task_scoring_v1.0, model claude-opus-5, computed 2026-08-05.
- Pay and employment
- bls-oews (May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx))bls-oews (May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx))
Figures on this page come from release 2026-q4.1, published 2026-08-05. Every release keeps its own permanent address, so a figure you cite in March is still there, unchanged, in November.
The plain-English wording on this page is assembled directly from the task statements and the published ratings, not written by hand for this occupation. That is why it is specific, and it is also why we say so.
The routes and free resources further up are today’s, not the release’s (last reviewed 2026-08-05). A route is an offer, not a historical fact, so it moves on its own clock.
Using these figures?
Cite this
Everything on this site is published under CC BY 4.0. Quote it, chart it, sell something built on it. Just say where it came from, and cite the dated release rather than the site, so the figure you quote stays checkable.
Plain text
Collab365 (2026). Collab365 Futureproof: task-level AI exposure for US and UK occupations, release 2026-q4.1 (methodVersion 2.0.0, promptVersion task_scoring_v1.0). https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1. Licensed CC BY 4.0. Built with O*NET data (USDOL/ETA, CC BY 4.0); ONS data (Open Government Licence v3.0); GAISI task framework (arXiv:2507.22748, MIT); BLS data (public domain).
BibTeX
@misc{collab365futureproof2026q41,
title = {Collab365 Futureproof: task-level AI exposure for US and UK occupations, release 2026-q4.1},
author = {{Collab365}},
year = {2026},
url = {https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1},
note = {Release 2026-q4.1, methodVersion 2.0.0, promptVersion task_scoring_v1.0, CC BY 4.0}
}Data as of release 2026-q4.1, published . Releases never change after publication; when the figures move, a new dated release is published beside this one and this one stays exactly where it is.