← Risk register SOC 29-1218 · reviewed 2026-08-11

Obstetricians and Gynecologists

21,260 US workers · median $292,910/yr · Healthcare

SAFE

The core of this job is physically inseparable from the patient: pelvic exams, cesarean sections, hysterectomies, laparoscopy, forceps and vacuum deliveries, and managing a hemorrhage at 3 a.m. AI is already useful for documentation, ultrasound and cytology screening, risk stratification, and coding, which trims clerical load but not clinical work. State licensure plus malpractice exposure — obstetrics is among the most litigated specialties — makes a named human physician legally and personally accountable for every delivery and operative decision.

10-year outlook: Demand stays ahead of supply through the 2030s amid maternity-care deserts and retirements; AI absorbs documentation and screening reads, which mostly buys back clinic time rather than cutting positions.

US employment, 2019–2025+14.2%
18,62021,260 workers

Headcount grew steadily across the period.

Median pay $239,200 → $292,910 -2.0% in real terms (nominal +22.5%, less ~25% US inflation over the period)

The job count is not the verdict

This line is counted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics — the one figure on this page that isn't a judgement of ours. Headcount moves on demand, offshoring, demographics and the business cycle, and automation is one term among several, often not the loudest.

So a falling line is not evidence that AI did it, and a rising one is not evidence that it won't. Both happen in this register: some occupations resist automation and shrink anyway, others are highly automatable and keep growing. The marked year is 2020.

BLS projection, 2024–2034

+1.2% 21,500 → 21,700 on the projections basis

Hard to automate, and growing

The work resists current AI and the BLS projects +1.2% more of these jobs by 2034. Note that safe does not mean well paid — several of the fastest-growing resistant occupations are among the lowest paid on the register.

Different clocks. The score is what current AI could do to this work today. The projection is how many of these jobs will exist in 2034. Everything between the two — how fast employers actually adopt, whether demand grows in the meantime — is why they can point opposite ways without either being wrong.

~600 openings a year on average, including replacing people who leave.

One email if this score changes. Watch as many occupations as you like from the same address — no account, and nothing is sent on a schedule, only when a verdict actually moves.

Also known as — 23 job titles this covers

Titles reported by people doing this work, from the US Department of Labor's O*NET survey. If your job title is here, this page is about your work even though the name doesn't match.

DoctorPhysicianHospitalistOB (Obstetrician)GYN (Gynecologist)MD (Medical Doctor)Gynecologic OncologistGynecological OncologistReproductive EndocrinologistOB/GYN (Obstetrician Gynecologist)GYN Physician (Gynecology Physician)OB Specialist (Obstetrics Specialist)OBGYN (Obstetrician and Gynecologist)Physician OB (Physician Obstetrician)Physician GYN (Physician Gynecologist)OBGYN Doctor (Obstetrics and Gynecology Doctor)OBGYN MD (Obstetrics Gynecology Medical Doctor)Maternal-Fetal Medicine Physician (MFM Physician)OB/GYN Physician (Obstetrics Gynecology Physician)OBGYN Physician (Obstetrics and Gynecology Physician)OB/GYN Generalist (Obstetrics and Gynecology Generalist)OBGYN Physician (Obstetrician and Gynecologist Physician)OB/GYN Hospitalist (Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospitalist)

Score — 91/100 resistance

Holding it up: embodiment (20/20). Weakest point: task resistance (16/20).

Five dimensions, 0–20 each, summed. Higher means more protected. The arithmetic is shown so you can check it: 16 + 20 + 20 + 17 + 18 = 91. · Scored 2026-08-11, and re-examined when evidence accumulates rather than on a schedule.

Task resistance 16/20

Tasks largely resist digitisation Reading a fetal heart tracing and deciding to move to the OR, then getting the head out through a shoulder dystocia with the McRoberts and Woods maneuvers, are not documentable-and-delegated tasks; the 16 rather than 19 reflects that a real share of an OB/GYN's week — well-woman counseling, Pap and HPV result triage, contraceptive management, prenatal visit templates — is protocol-driven and already partly absorbed by nurse practitioners, midwives and algorithmic screening.

Embodiment 20/20

Hands-on in uncontrolled environments There is no version of a cesarean, a manual placenta extraction, a cerclage, a colposcopy-directed biopsy, or a bimanual uterine massage for atony that happens through a screen, and the environment is uncontrolled by definition: labor decompensates on its own schedule, the patient is bleeding, and you are the person with your hands inside a body cavity — that is the top of the band.

Liability shield 20/20

Licensed human required and personally liable State medical licensure plus DEA registration plus hospital privileges and board certification all attach to one named individual, and obstetrics carries among the highest malpractice premiums and longest tail liability in medicine because a birth injury claim can be filed until the child reaches majority — the physician who signed the delivery note is the defendant, not the software that flagged the tracing.

Trust premium 17/20

The human relationship is the product Patients pick an OB/GYN and stay for decades of Paps, contraception, infertility work-up, and then choose who is in the room at the birth of their child — that continuity is the practice's economic base; the 17 rather than 20 acknowledges call-pool reality, where the person delivering you at 3 a.m. is often whoever is on the schedule.

Judgment & accountability 18/20

Exists to be accountable for ambiguous calls Deciding whether to induce at 39 weeks, when to abandon a trial of labor after cesarean, whether a previable pregnancy meets the state's maternal-life exception, or how to counsel a patient with an abnormal NIPT result are calls made under time pressure with incomplete data and two patients' interests to weigh — the 18 rather than 20 reflects genuine guardrails from ACOG practice bulletins and institutional protocols.

Confidence: high · reviewed 2026-08-11 · how scoring works

What this job involves — and which parts are yours

The verdict above describes this occupation as a whole. Almost nobody does the typical version of a job — tick what's actually in your week and see how your own mix sits.

AI already does these at usable quality

These still need a person

Active moats on the surviving side: embodiment, licensure, liability, trust, judgment

How to future-proof this job

Where to go deeper on what this job runs on: Coursera — critical thinking and logic, audit free free to audit · Khan Academy — reading and vocabulary, all levels, free free · Coursera — active listening and communication skills free to audit · MIT OpenCourseWare — full course materials across every department, free free · Purdue OWL — the standard reference for professional writing free · Toastmasters — public speaking practice at local clubs worldwide low

All 35 skills ranked by how many jobs they open →

What would move this back up — beyond any one person

The moves above are yours to make. This is the other half: what would have to change in the world for the occupation itself to score higher. None of it is in any one person's gift, but it is where the floor actually comes from. Scores here are not a one-way ratchet. Only two of the five dimensions — task resistance and embodiment — track what machines can do. The other three track law, what buyers will pay for, and who is answerable, and those move in both directions, often in response to the same pressure AI creates. If every lever below landed, this occupation would score around 97/100, still SAFE.

3 specific changes that would raise this score
  • already happening task resistance +2

    Task-mix shift: ambient documentation (Nuance DAX, Abridge), AI fetal-biometry and cytology triage, and autocoding absorb the clerical and screening tier, leaving operative management, shoulder dystocia and hemorrhage response, and ambiguous fetal-heart-tracing calls. The residual day is almost entirely the judgment tier.

  • plausible trust premium +2

    Continued shift of low-risk births to midwife-led and freestanding birth-center care raises the OB's remaining case mix to high-acuity, and patients choosing hospital OB care are specifically buying named-physician continuity (e.g., laborist vs. private-practice 'my doctor delivers me' models marketed by practices, plus doula/patient advocacy pressure for a known attending). If payers begin covering continuity-of-provider arrangements explicitly, the willingness to pay for a specific human becomes contractual rather than preferential.

  • plausible judgment accountability +2

    If ACOG/state perinatal quality collaboratives formalize a named-attending sign-off for AI-flagged fetal monitoring interpretation and for cesarean indication (mirroring existing NTSV cesarean-rate accountability reporting), the ambiguity calls become explicitly attributed rather than diffused across a care team.

The limit. embodiment and liability_shield are already at 20; the composite is within a few points of the maximum, so realistic movement is marginal. The meaningful risk to this occupation is scope reallocation to midwives and CNMs and rural unit closures cutting headcount, not AI substitution of the physician's task set.

These are conditions, not forecasts — what would have to happen, not what will. Specific rules, cases and bills are named so you can go and check whether they exist and where they stand; verify before relying on any of them. Nothing here is legal or financial advice.

Where this work is, and what it pays there

BLS metro figures for 58 areas. The verdict above does not change by city — the rubric judges what the work involves, not where it happens — but pay and headcount do, and the national median hides a very wide range.

Most of these jobs

New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ 2,470 $329,750 +13%
Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL-IN 1,120 $208,000 -29%
Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX 770 $321,260 +10%
Detroit-Warren-Dearborn, MI 550 $209,550 -28%
Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH 500 $235,460 -20%
Columbus, OH 490 $179,810 -39%
Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI 490 $306,770 +5%
Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL 410 —

Best paid

Burlington-South Burlington, VT 70 $444,290 +52%
Portland-South Portland, ME 40 $438,700 +50%
Ogden, UT 50 $428,800 +46%

Percentages are against this occupation's national median of $292,910. Counts are jobs in that metro, not vacancies. Metros where the BLS suppressed the cell are absent rather than shown as zero.

Who is actually doing this — nobody, on the record

We have no reported case of a named organisation automating this occupation. Not one deployment, not one announcement.

That is worth saying out loud next to a score of 91. The verdict above is about what the work exposes — what current AI could do to these tasks. It is not a claim that anyone has done it. For this occupation those two things have come apart completely: the capability argument is on this page, and the evidence column is empty.

Read that as a gap in the reporting we can see, not proof of absence — the dispatch runs on English-language feeds and misses plenty. If you know of a case, tell us, or add a field report from inside the job.

Quick take — do you do this job?

Has AI actually changed your work? One tap, anonymous, and the running tally is public. Nothing else is asked of you.

Self-reported and unverified — a sentiment signal, not a survey. One response per person per occupation; you can change your answer.

Field reports — what people say has changed

No field reports yet. A written account takes a paragraph rather than a tap, goes to an editor before it appears, and is the one thing on this page the rubric cannot produce on its own.

File a field report

Concrete beats general: a tool that arrived, a task that moved, a headcount decision you watched happen. Don't include anything that identifies you or your employer if that would put you at risk.

Watch this verdict
Kept current

Rather than check back: get the digest and we'll tell you what changed — or watch a single occupation from its own page.