PROJECT: THE MIDWIFE MRS YOLANDE MARITZ-FOUCHEE CASE - WHAT HAPPENED AND WHY IT MATTERS
- Apr 20
- 8 min read
PLEASE SHARE THIS PUBLIC DOCUMENT
HISTORY:
This case raises complex and necessary questions regarding trust, accountability, and the standard of care expected within childbirth services.
It centres on criminal proceedings instituted against a former midwife whose practice came under sustained scrutiny following multiple complaints involving severe birth complications and adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes.
What originated as a private maternity service in Pretoria evolved into a multifaceted legal matter, progressing from professional disciplinary processes to the High Court, where evidence was rigorously examined during a full criminal trial.
The case underscores the consequences that arise when clinical judgement, professional responsibility, and patient safety converge in high-risk medical environments.
It further illustrates the threshold at which allegations of medical negligence escalate into criminal liability, and how the justice system responds to such severity.
In 2021, Specialised Security Services (SSS) was formally mandated by Mrs. Carien Moller and Mr. Jaco Moller to investigate the conduct of former midwife, Mrs. Yolande Maritz-Fouchee, whose activities in Pretoria became the subject of significant professional and criminal scrutiny.
During the course of the SSS investigation, a substantial volume of allegations was received, indicating a pattern of concern from multiple complainants.
SSS further supported its clients, as well as additional affected parties, during proceedings before the South African Nursing Council (SANC) in Pretoria, ensuring that the matter received the necessary attention and oversight.
Through this involvement, SSS contributed to bringing the case into the public domain, thereby encouraging broader accountability.
As the matter progressed, additional role-players became involved, facilitating the opening and investigation of criminal cases.
Accordingly, recognition must be given to the South African Police Service (SAPS) investigative team, the National Prosecuting Authority, the witnesses, and the medical experts whose coordinated efforts contributed to the successful prosecution in this matter.
HER MAIN MIDWIFE ACTIVITIES:
She operated the "You&Me Birthing Centre" in Pretoria East, where she offered home-birth and natural-birth services to pregnant women outside a hospital setting.
Her practice focused on private midwife-led births, labour monitoring, antenatal guidance, and birth support for mothers choosing non-hospital deliveries.
She also continued offering pregnancy-related services after deregistration, including mobile ultrasound services advertised under iBaby Mobile Ultrasound.
DISCIPLINARY AND LEGAL ACTION:
The disciplinary findings by the South African Nursing Council (SANC) against Mrs. Yolande Maritz-Fouchee in 2021 are actually very important, because they laid the groundwork for the later criminal case.
WHAT SHE WAS FOUND GUILTY OF AT THE SANC:
She was found guilty of multiple counts of unprofessional conduct (commonly cited as five counts).
The specific conduct behind those findings included:
FAILING TO RECOGNISE AND ACT ON HIGH-RISK PREGNANCIES:
She ignored or downplayed serious pregnancy risk factors in patients.
Did not escalate care or refer mothers to hospitals or specialists when required.
This is one of the most serious breaches in midwifery practice.
PRACTISING BEYOND HER SCOPE OF COMPETENCE:
She handled cases that were not low-risk, despite presenting her services as suitable only for normal births.
Performed or attempted interventions that should be done by obstetric specialists.
USE OF UNSAFE OR INAPPROPRIATE MEDICAL INTERVENTIONS:
Allegations included inducing or augmenting labour using substances like Cytotec (misoprostol).
In some cases, this was reportedly done without proper disclosure or consent.
FAILURE TO ENSURE PROPER MONITORING AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE:
Inadequate monitoring of:
fetal distress;
labour complications.
Delayed transfer to hospital care, even when warning signs were present.
MISREPRESENTATION OF HER CAPABILITIES:
She presented herself as capable of managing births that were not appropriate for a midwife-led setting.
This created a false sense of safety for patients.
RELATED CONCERNS RAISED DURING THE PROCEEDINGS:
While not always separate formal counts, evidence also pointed to:
use of unqualified assistance.
reliance on limited or informal training (e.g. sonars) to make clinical judgments.
OUTCOME OF DISCIPLINARY PROCESS:
She was found guilty of unprofessional conduct.
And ultimately removed (deregistered) from the nursing register in 2021.
Despite that, allegations followed that she continued practising or presenting herself in related maternity services.
CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS UPDATE:
On 24 July 2024, Mrs. Yolande Maritz-Fouchee made her first court appearance in the Pretoria Magistrate’s Court in relation to multiple serious criminal allegations arising from her activities as a practising midwife.
A total of fourteen criminal charges form part of the formal indictment, including assault, culpable homicide, fraud, and contravention of the Nursing Act.
The indictment was formally served on 1 October 2024, on which date the matter was transferred to the Gauteng Division of the High Court of South Africa, Pretoria.
The trial commenced in May 2025, during which Mrs. Maritz-Fouchee entered a plea of not guilty to all charges.
The matter was presided over by Judge Papi Mosopa, with the State’s case led by Advocate Jennifer Cronje.
Following the presentation and testing of evidence, the Court found Mrs. Maritz-Fouchee guilty on all fourteen charges.
In delivering judgment, Judge Mosopa made a critical credibility finding, stating that Mrs. Maritz-Fouchee is “undoubtedly an intelligent person who is capable of adjusting her testimony,” and accordingly rejected her version of events in its entirety.
The matter has been postponed to 25 May 2026 for sentencing.
Mrs. Maritz-Fouchee is expected to remain in custody pending the finalisation of sentencing proceedings.
Specialised Security Services (SSS) will issue a follow-up project and detailed analysis once sentencing outcomes have been formally handed down.
WHY THIS CASE MATTERS NATIONALLY:
This case has become one of South Africa’s most closely watched medico-legal matters because it raises hard questions about:
Oversight of private midwife practices.
When high-risk pregnancies must be escalated to hospital care.
Regulation after professional deregistration.
OVERSIGHT FAILURES IN PRIVATE MIDWIFE PRACTICES, SYSTEM STRUCTURE, GAP ANALYSIS, AND RISK EXPOSURE:
1. PROFESSIONAL REGULATION: WHO IS LEGALLY PERMITTED TO PRACTISE
The primary regulatory authority is the South African Nursing Council (SANC).
MANDATE AND FUNCTIONS OF THE SANC:
Registration and licensing of midwives.
Determination of the scope of practice (limited to low-risk pregnancies).
Investigation of professional misconduct complaints.
Authority to suspend or strike practitioners from the register.
LEGAL POSITION:
Once deregistered, an individual is prohibited from legally practising as a midwife.
OVERSIGHT GAP:
Enforcement is largely reactive, triggered by complaints rather than proactive monitoring.
Limited operational capacity to physically prevent deregistered individuals from continuing informal or unregistered practice.
2. HEALTH FACILITY OVERSIGHT: WHERE BIRTHS TAKE PLACE
Private birthing facilities fall under provincial health regulation.
In Gauteng, this responsibility lies with the Gauteng Department of Health.
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS:
Valid facility licensing.
Compliance with health and safety standards.
Established emergency transfer protocols.
Availability of appropriate medical equipment.
OVERSIGHT GAP:
Emergence of grey-area operations, including home-based or hybrid birthing setups.
Inconsistent inspection frequency and enforcement intensity.
3. SCOPE OF PRACTICE: CLINICAL LIMITATIONS
Midwives are clinically restricted to:
Managing low-risk pregnancies only.
Referring high-risk cases to obstetricians or hospitals.
Avoiding advanced or invasive interventions beyond their training.
OVERSIGHT GAP:
Heavy reliance on self-regulation and practitioner judgement.
No real-time oversight of:
Fetal distress identification and response.
Timing and urgency of hospital transfers.
4. COMPLAINT-DRIVEN SYSTEM: RESPONSE AFTER HARM
Oversight escalation typically occurs only after:
A patient lodges a formal complaint.
A neonatal injury or fatality occurs.
A hospital flags a concerning referral.
PROCESS FLOW:
SANC initiates a disciplinary investigation.
The South African Police Service (SAPS) may open a criminal case.
OVERSIGHT GAP:
Intervention is post-incident, not preventative.
System activation occurs only after harm has already materialised.
5. CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM: LAST LINE OF DEFENCE
In cases of severe negligence, matters escalate to prosecution through the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA).
SSS RISK FINDING:
Criminal prosecution represents a failure point, not a prevention mechanism.
By this stage, the system has already failed to protect patients.
KEY SYSTEMIC WEAKNESSES IDENTIFIED:
1. FRAGMENTED OVERSIGHT STRUCTURE:
SANC (professional regulation).
Department of Health (facility compliance).
SAPS (criminal investigation).
No single authority maintains centralised, real-time control.
2. LACK OF PROACTIVE MONITORING:
No continuous auditing of:
Patient risk classification.
Clinical decision-making during labour.
3. ENFORCEMENT LIMITATIONS:
Deregistered practitioners may continue to:
Operate informally.
Rebrand services (e.g. “birth support”, ultrasound services).
Advise patients outside regulated structures.
4. PATIENT AWARENESS DEFICIT:
Patients often:
Do not fully understand risk classifications.
Rely heavily on practitioner reassurance rather than independent verification.
SSS STRATEGIC RECOMMENDATIONS: STRENGTHENING OVERSIGHT
To mitigate risk and improve patient safety, the following interventions are critical:
Implementation of a centralised national reporting system for adverse birth outcomes.
Introduction of digitally tracked, real-time referral protocols.
Strengthening of licensing and inspection frameworks for private birthing facilities.
Active enforcement of criminal penalties for post-deregistration practice.
Development of a public, real-time accessible practitioner registry.
South Africa does have an established regulatory framework governing midwifery practice. However, the current system is:
Reactive rather than preventative.
Fragmented rather than integrated.
Cases of this nature demonstrate a consistent pattern:
oversight mechanisms only become effective after harm has occurred.
From an SSS risk perspective, this represents a critical failure in early intervention capability,
leaving patients exposed during the most vulnerable phases of maternal care.
RELEVANT SSS PROJECTS:
Specialised Security Services invites the public to the Mike Bolhuis Daily Projects WhatsApp Channel.
This channel is important in delivering insights into the latest crime trends, awareness, warnings and the exposure of criminals.
How to Join the WhatsApp Channel:
1. Make sure you have the latest version of WhatsApp on your device.
2. Click on the link below to join the Mike Bolhuis Daily Projects WhatsApp Channel:
3. Follow the prompts to join the channel.
4. Make sure you click on "Follow", then click on the "bell"-icon (🔔)
CONTACT MR MIKE BOLHUIS FOR SAFETY AND SECURITY MEASURES, PROTECTION, OR AN INVESTIGATION IF NEEDED.
ALL INFORMATION RECEIVED WILL BE TREATED IN THE STRICTEST CONFIDENTIALITY AND EVERY IDENTITY WILL BE PROTECTED.
Regards,
Mike Bolhuis
Specialist Investigators into
Serious Violent, Serious Economic Crimes & Serious Cybercrimes
PSIRA Reg. 1590364/421949
Mobile: +27 82 447 6116
E-mail: mike@mikebolhuis.co.za
Fax: 086 585 4924
Follow us on Facebook to view our projects -
EXTREMELY IMPORTANT: All potential clients need to be aware that owing to the nature of our work as specialist investigators there are people who have been caught on the wrong side of the law - who are trying to discredit me - Mike Bolhuis and my organisation Specialised Security Services - to get themselves off the hook. This retaliation happens on social media and creates doubt about our integrity and ability. Doubt created on social media platforms is both unwarranted and untrue. We strongly recommend that you make up your minds concerning me and our organisation only after considering all the factual information - to the exclusion of hearsay and assumptions. Furthermore, you are welcome to address your concerns directly with me should you still be unsatisfied with your conclusions. While the internet provides a lot of valuable information, it is also a platform that distributes a lot of false information. The distribution of false information, fake news, slander and hate speech constitutes a crime that can be prosecuted by law. Your own research discretion and discernment are imperative when choosing what and what not to believe.
STANDARD RULES APPLY: Upon appointment, we require a formal mandate with detailed instructions. Please take note that should you not make use of our services – you may not under any circumstance use my name or the name of my organisation as a means to achieve whatever end.
POPI ACT 4 of 2013 South Africa: Mike Bolhuis' "Specialised Security Services" falls under Section 6 of the act. Read more here: https://mikebh.link/fntdpv
SSS TASK TEAM:
Copyright © 2015- PRESENT | Mike Bolhuis Specialised Security Services | All rights reserved.
Our mailing address is:
Mike Bolhuis Specialised Security Services
PO Box 15075 Lynn East
Pretoria, Gauteng 0039
South Africa
Add us to your address book
THIS PUBLIC DOCUMENT WAS INTENDED TO BE SHARED, PLEASE DO SO.
