Is it really ok that some GPs can refuse to prescribe the MAP

I agree. What about ectopic pregnancies weegie? Or does that come under abortion too? What about when a woman could genuinely die?

weegie from my experience with doctors, though, immediate means 'next available with Dr X today' - or 'wait until Dr X's current appointment is done' or 'we'll catch Dr X in twenty minutes' - whereas if I knew that your husband (who I'm sure is a lovely man and great at other areas of care) didn't provide full reproductive health care, I could just go straight to Dr X. Which would save me at least half an hour, and incidentally free up your husband to be seeing a patient for whom he could/would offer care. So surely, if people like your husband are open and upfront about the areas of female healthcare they don't/won't do, it actually helps everyone?

I'm not suggesting all doctors who won't prescribe the MAP or refer for abortions be struck off, after all. I'm saying people who strongly believe that they shouldn't do these things, should be strongly open about it, so that patients can make an informed choice, do what's right for them, and save everyone time and money.

As for going straight to A&E - as if that were ever quick! If I could go straight to a doctor who'd prescribe it, wouldn't that be more straightforward and free up vital NHS emergency resources, etc?

It just strikes me as a good idea that doctors whose beliefs prevent them from providing all aspects of female reproductive healthcare share this information with their female patients before their female patients come to them in their time of need, and have to find others to help them. Surely it'd save everyone time, energy, pain, etc?

Blackcurrants - he would get them an immediate appointment with Dr X, no need for extra time off. Or, for map they can go direct to A&E.

If someone has been raped they need a specialist service, not a GP. He would offer help and reassurance and refer on to a specialist rape service (which is available) ASAP.

I think it's quite right that GPs shouldn't have to provide a particular service based on their conscience. But it should be made known the the practices patients.

Would it also be Ok for Jehova's Witnesses to not send a patient for a blood transfusion?

weegiemum if your husband performs first responder care..what happens when he meets a woman who has just been raped? He doesn't want to give her the MAP? That goes against his conscience?

Agree with Blackcurrants, if a GP wishes to opt out of providing this sort of care it should be made very clear to all women patients at that surgery.

So wrong, it will always be issues that affect women that the religious will choose care about. All religions have so many edicts of what we should and shouldn't do.. how many are really followed? How many really concern people?

weegiemum I'm not saying he should resign.

I would prefer it if he were clear about not providing the full range of reproductive health care, though - much quicker to get a direct appointment with Dr X, than get one with your husband, find out he can't help me, and have to make another one with Dr X (including getting another afternoon off work at a very stressful time, possibly costing me money if I do shift work, etc).

If "the doctors" are causing unnecessary delays, then report them: they are breaking guidelines and doing wrong. What is the current estimate of the number of mishandled cases?

But the Amish bus driver example of course does not apply here. The current legal/contract arrangements means no one is doing anything forbidden, and it is not unreasonable to exercise this existing conscience clause.

This makes me cross.

My dh is a GP. He does not prescribe the MAP or refer for abortion because of conscience.

However, he provides immediate trauma care, first responder to emergencies in the community, home hospice for dying patients, evening appointments, early morning appointments, is a specialist in mental health issues, plus providing top quality care in all areas (I know, I know some of his patients and I've seen his appraisal reports).

If a patient asks for MAP or termination referral, he never lectures, just says sorry, I don't provide that service, please see Dr X who does.

Should he resign? In his health board area, it would be hard to replace someone with his set of skills. And he's never had a complainant about this part of his service or any other and that's damn rare for a GP!

Tea US newcaster Rachel Maddow calls it the "Amish Bus Driver" rule. If you're Amish, your religious beliefs prohibit you from driving (or even being in!) a car or bus. Fine - that's absolutely fine, you're free to believe and practice that belief. But if you, Amish person who cannot sit behind a wheel and drive because of your beliefs, apply for a job as a bus driver ... YABU! And YABVVU to then sue the company who, rightly, won't hire you because you can't/won't drive - for 'discriminating against my religious beliefs.'

If you're not prepared to give women the full range of reproductive health care, fine, but don't advertise that you're a medical professional who gives comprehensive care. At the very least I want some kind of plaque in your waiting room and notice on your website that says "I don't refer for abortions or prescribe the morning after pill" - that way I won't waste my time trying to see you, and I can find someone else.

Doctors are allowed to refuse to refer for abortion, but must refer to another doctor who is willing to consider it (if the woman meets the criteria, ofc, which most women will do by virtue of making an appointment to say that they don't want to continue with their pregnancy).

Midwives are allowed to exercise conscientious objection to the administration of abortive medications (e.g. misoprostol) but are not allowed to opt-out of any care that a woman undergoing termination of pregnancy requires.

So, for midwives, they can ask for another midwife to insert a pessary, say, but can not ask that another midwife is assigned to the woman.

Imo, if your religious beliefs prevent you from carrying out medical procedures that are in your patient's best interests, you have no right to practice as a doctor.

I suspect these doctors play a big role in pushing up the UK's late abortion figures by causing unnecessary delays.

I still would love. Doesn't seem right to me at all!

no, the doctor was young and female and I was with my daughter

no reason on earth to not a) ask the appropriate questions to circumvent even needing a swab in the first place 2) just do the swab herself if she felt it necessary (I can see there might be an argument to be sure with a first-complaint 14 yo that it was actually thrush)

I should have complained shouldn't I ? Shit.

I would expect a HCP to be able to take a swab like that. Unless thre was an issue like it being a male GP and no chaperone available?

that's just it bee

my daughter was not sexually active, never used a tampon, ended up in tears because she didn't know what to do and I did it in the end

I didn't mind, but must have been excruciating for her and it took ages to calm her down sufficiently to let me do it

how is that better than an impassive, professional doctor just getting it over with in a jiffy in an appropriately clinical place with a minimum of fuss ?

I don't get it

in retrospect, I should have suggested that at the time

sorry, am derailing, but it's bothered me ever since because i think it was that doctor's squeamishness and embarassment that was the problem, not me and not my dd

I don't know love, but I think its highly inappropriate and worthy of a complaint tbh. I've never even been swabbed for thrush, just handed the prescription and sent to the chemists! Honestly it seems bizarre. Thrush treatment isn't something I'd personally class as a contraceptive service, each time I've had it its been following a course of antibiotics.

Doing your own low vaginal swab is more comfortable than an examination surely? It's certainly an option for chlamydia testing for teens (appreciate that that's likely to be taken up by a girl who is sexually active).

she didn't examine her either, and the questions she asked were not appropriate to diagnose without a swab or an exam, in any case (I don't mean inappropriate, I mean adequate^ I suppose)

the doctor just seemed highly uncomfortable with it all