Or should GP surgery's not be allowed to advertise themselves as 'pro-life'?

Or which surgery to register with, if you live there and feel strongly about being prolife.

I would absolutely prefer a pro-life GP surgery.

Doctors are very specifically allowed to withdraw from providing abortion services under the law. There is no need to conflate this with women's health as it is one part of it. They are not refusing to provide health care to women.
Do you agree they should be allowed to?
And if so how?

This sounds odd, to have a collective message like that on their website

If it was me, I'd be registering as a patient elsewhere, who knows what else this 'pro-life' approach will encompass

But then I'm lucky living in suburbia with other options, not so much if it was a rural practice with not another GP in sight for miles...

I would absolutely love to be with a pro-life GP surgery. I think it’s great that they advertise it, so everyone knows where they stand. Wonderful!

Incidentally comparing basic reproductive rights to euthanasia is a stock forced birther tactic to force equivalence between adult consenting humans with fertliseds eggs. Don't fall for it.

If you seriously believe prescribing contraception pills and IUDs which prevents implantation or MAP are "ending human life' you are a forced birther.

If you read my posts properly you will see I quite clearly say individuals may be accommodated within a practice where other practitioners provide the services and that area health authorities/trusts should not be procuring services from partnerships which do not provide all of those services from within that practice.

Incidentally, blocking and withholding access to psychiatric, diabetic and vaccination services can also result in death and all have their opponents (including in the NHS).

Any GP practice refusing to provide vaccinations would be on the front page of the tabloids but the NHS has always regarded women's health as some kind of optional bolt on rather than part of its core services. There is still no shortage of HCPs who try to restrict women's access reproductive services within existing practices without entire practices being allowed to opt out.

As PP say - when you are sat on the unsackable six figure salary its easy to play "ethics' with women's lives.

Well in this instance surely it's better for patients to be aware up front?

But what I mean by there being no such thing as "neutral healthcare" - what I mean is that the very definition of "healthcare" is highly political and constantly evolving (fast, as develments in biotech are accelerating). Far better to allow individuals to seek like minded practitioners. Isn't that the liberal ideal?

Paranoid ? Abortion rights are not set in stone. Look at the US. You're very naive if you think there aren't HCPs out there who will do all they can to block access to abortion. Someone up thread said they have worked with plenty !

This thread is ridiculous. And posters extremely paranoid.
Clarify their exact meaning but terminations are only done by SOME Drs and referral only by SOME drs. That is the law and GMC guidance. They will refer on- probably to a clinic which can sort it all directly , U think it's usually a case of giving the clinic number , sometimes to another GP.

Any GP can do that. I mean they shouldn't, but evidently some do.

Given they are clear about their stance on their website, it means that women know in advance, so they can go straight to a sexual health clinic or Marie stopes, without having to have a awkward conversation with the GP that's going to make them feel rubbish and delay things.

Better they are upfront about it IMO, and women can register elsewhere if concerned.

They state in their policies and procedures that they will refer you on for termination advise. That is the law and accords with medical guidelines. I really don't think it is fair to imply bad faith on their part without any evidence. Doctors are allowed to be pro life and there is really no other way of accommodating that perfectly legitimate stance other than by referring on.

They don't have to do it willingly.

They can make women feel bad.

They can delay.

Any practice which puts that on their website is pretty extreme.

Well I can understand them making their personal view known if it might influence whether a woman chooses to register with them.
If they announced they were vegan, that would be an irrelevance.
They do say on their website under policies and procedures that they will refer you elsewhere for an abortion.

They are making a statement about their personal beliefs, they don't need to do that. Patients don't need to know if its not affecting care.

They have to refer on under the guidelines. Check the BMA website.

Where do they say that?
Do you think they likely refer on willingly, or make it clear that they don't approve?
what about contraception?
emergency contraception?

They have said that they will refer on so I don't see what your problem is.

You are straw manning.

No one has said doctors must be forced to participate but they are obliged to signpost patients to other services.

There is no need at all for them to make a statement about their personal beliefs.

You should engage with the arguments being made not the ones you are inventing.

GPs don't usually sign the forms, only signpost, but I would worry that this lot woulnd't be happy to signpost.

The level of hyperbole on this thread is off the scale. The 67 Act provides for conscientious objectors to refuse participation in abortions and as GPs are usually one of the signatories on the authorisation form, they are free to decline. What they must do is refer on as per the guidelines. That's what this surgery does and that's fine. Get over it.
Do you think doctors should be forced to authorise assisted dying if that is brought in. I'm pretty sure there will be a conscientious objection proviso or perhaps you will be demanding compliance.
By the way I am not a Christian and nor am I pro life but I don't like fundamentalists on either side and there are posters on here sounding like the thought police.

Doesn't look like a hugely rural area where there would be no choice

A quick google of the phrase has found the practice https://www.stpeterssurgery.com/clinics/
I wouldn't register there. They should have at least one doctor who will deal with requests for a termination.

If you live within the catchment and you can only register with a GP if you live in their catchment, how do you avoid them if you don't live within the catchment area of another GP taking on patients?

This is a issue precisely because many GPs effectively are monopolies and many people don't have the option to go elsewhere.

My other concern that strikes me as discrimination against people who are not pro-life. You can't discriminate on the basis of belief when employing.

This could well be in-direct religious discrimination to prevent someone who isn't from the 'wrong religious upbringing - including lack of faith' from getting the job in a particular community.

It's potentially unlawful imho.

I just always thought they would be neutral to your decisions about pregnancy. Would make
me feel even more shit than I would
anyway.