The UK Supreme Court has rejected the opportunity to uphold the
right of conscientious objection for senior midwives who refuse to supervise
abortions performed on a labour ward. Today's decision issued in the Supreme
Court has been condemned by those who backed the Glasgow midwives' fight for
their right to work in the NHS without being involved in abortions.
Photograph shows Mary Doogan and Connie Wood with John Smeaton and Paul Tully of SPUC
The Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC)
which paid the midwives’ legal expenses throughout the case has said that
senior midwives who refuse to kill babies could be forced to leave the
profession.
Mary Doogan and Connie Wood, the midwives in the case,
commented on the judgment:
“We are both saddened and extremely disappointed with today's verdict from the Supreme Court and can only imagine the subsequent detrimental consequences that will result from today's decision on staff of conscience throughout the UK.“Despite it having been recognised that the number of abortions on the labour ward at our hospital is in fact a tiny percentage of the workload, which in turn could allow the accommodation of conscientious objection with minimal effort, this judgment, with its constraints and narrow interpretation, has resulted in the provision of a conscience clause which now in practice is meaningless for senior midwives on a labour ward.
Paul Tully, general secretary of SPUC said:
“The Society for the Protection of Unborn Children
acknowledges the great debt that the whole pro-life community owes to Mary
Doogan and Connie Wood for fighting this battle over the past seven years. They
have fought not only for their own careers, but for all current and future
members of the profession who uphold the right to life of everyone, from the
time of conception, without discrimination. We are bitterly disappointed for
them.
“Today's decision sadly makes it likely that senior midwives
who refuse to kill babies will be forced to leave the profession. Junior
midwives might still be able to work in labour wards where abortions are
performed but they will be restricted to 'staff midwife' status at best. They could easily be placed in an impossible
situation by pro-abortion superiors, and would be unable to receive promotion
to a more senior role without fear of being required to violate their
consciences. This will affect anyone who
objects to abortion, of any religion or none.
It will create a second-class status in midwifery for those who only
deliver babies and don't kill them.
“Furthermore, the court has used the opportunity of this
case to decide that the conscience clause in the Abortion Act does not apply to
General Practitioners and that hospital doctors asked to prescribe abortion
drugs will not be covered by the conscience clause. We anticipate that this will lead to renewed
efforts by health officials to force doctors who have a conscientious objection
to abortion either to compromise their respect for human life or to leave the
profession. SPUC will support and
encourage doctors to resist any such bullying approach.
“The pro-abortion lobby has long argued that conscientious
objectors should be required to refer women seeking legal abortion to other
practitioners. Bodies such as the
Department of Health have qualified this by saying that this only applies when
the statutory grounds for a legal abortion apply, but the Supreme Court has
said that any medical professional who refuses to provide an abortion should
arrange for a referral to someone else who will do so. This seems to go far
beyond the scope of the Abortion Act, and furthermore is not even an issue
there was any need for the Court to decide in this case.
“The Court has nevertheless said that midwives and doctors
with conscientious objections are obliged to refer abortion patients to
colleagues who don't object to abortion.
This goes further than the General Medical Council, for instance, whose
current guidance Personal Belief and Medical Practice says that doctors
should refer patients to another doctor, but does not require them to check
their colleague's pro-abortion credentials.”
