Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To expect a midwife to carry out termination duties?

913 replies

foglike · 18/01/2012 11:30

To think a midwife has to carry out these duties and not claim religious discrimination because she's catholic?

bbc link

OP posts:
MildlyNarkyPuffin · 18/01/2012 18:01

These women are not being asked to carry out abortions or induce early labour

Moominsarescary · 18/01/2012 18:02

It's about looks when your talking about it upsetting mw

A baby is a foetus from 11 weeks till the time it is born, Calling it a foetus at 20, 30, 40 weeks doesnt stop it being what it is a developing baby

And yes I'm sure women who have late terminations due to medical reasons and people who have late losses call them babys after a certain number of weeks that's what they are, like it or not

Rational · 18/01/2012 18:02

"Well, termination of a pregnancy is not a normal task of a midwife,...."

Caring for the women having terminations was in the remit of these nurses job, they were unwilling to perform it. They should get another job.

As has been stated, they were not being asked to carry out abortions, only care for the women. But, even if they had, if it had been in their job remit, they should carry it out, or get another job.

I wouldn't join the army because I wouldn't want to shoot a person.

And it is not the death of an unborn baby, it is the termination of a pregnancy, a foetus is removed.

trafficwarden · 18/01/2012 18:05

I'm going to reiterate for those who have not read the link in the OP's question and those who either have not read the thread or are bringing their own agenda to it:

These midwives say they do not want to be involved in the deployment of staff to look after women undergoing termination.

They are labour ward sisters. This means they have at least a few years of experience and knew fine well what their job description was. This is part of their job.

Nobody is asking them to be actively involved in the procedure which they are entitled to decline. However they are obliged to raise their concerns as early as possible which they obviously did not do.

It's FACT that late terminations are managed in labour ward and the women cared for by midwives. They have not complied with the clearly stated professional standards of their governing body. If you don't want to be involved, work elsewhere.

I understand how emotive the subject is and some interesting points have been raised. But the fact of the matter is this:

If you are a midwife in labour ward you know this is going to happen on your patch. If you have such strong objections move away from that area.

Someone wrote they would refuse on the grounds of their own mental health. Midwives see an awful lot of things that impact upon their emotions and stress levels but I'm glad most of us think of the women in our care first because that's our job.

Rational · 18/01/2012 18:06

So, going along the lines of it being ok to terminate this 'baby' if it has a congenital defect, it makes logical sense then that you think it's ok to terminate the life of a disabled two year old?

If it's a 'baby' then surely it's NEVER ok to terminate the pregnancy?

Dillydaydreaming · 18/01/2012 18:07

The OP is not unreasonable in expecting a labour ward sister to deploy staff. GPs can also opt out of the process but they need to give the patient an idea of who she can see instead.

Dillydaydreaming · 18/01/2012 18:10

The thread is not about eugenics though is it? I opted NOT to have testing in pregnancy as I knew I's never terminate BUT if I had done so then I would expect a labour ward sister and midwife to arrange care for me even if they objected to doing so themselves. As far as so know it's always been part of the job to do this.

entropygirl · 18/01/2012 18:11

I think it is particularly morally destitute to work for an organisation that performs terminations and then say 'oh yeah its fine if other people do it but I'm not going to get my hands dirty - now pass me my pay check.'

Either object and choose not to work for the NHS, or admit you are already complicit in their policies even if you dont have actual blood on your hands and get on and do your job.

Rational · 18/01/2012 18:13

"The thread is not about eugenics though is it? "

No, but when people start calling foetuses a 'baby' then they should qualify that.

JestersHat · 18/01/2012 18:18

YANBU.

Termination is legal and IMO there should be no option for staff to refuse to provide this service.

If someone is against termination they shouldn't take a job where it could be expected.

All kinds of jobs have aspects which someone may prefer not to do. You just have to weigh up whether you still want the job - with everything involved - or not.

zzzzz · 18/01/2012 18:24

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

YuleingFanjo · 18/01/2012 18:25

i have had an abortion and a medically managed miscarriage (wave to my stalker) and there is definitely a difference. i wouldn't want an anti-abortionist/pro-lifer at either procedure but I can see there is a difference in terms of emotional choices and impact but very much dependant on teh individual.

Rational · 18/01/2012 18:28

Most people don't bring their dodgy religious 'morals' to their work with them.

I'm not sure what's so hard to understand, they need to get a new job.

zzzzz · 18/01/2012 18:31

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Rational · 18/01/2012 18:33

No they don't. Most people only use it when it suits them.

zzzzz · 18/01/2012 18:36

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

purplewednesday · 18/01/2012 18:37

YABU

The termination act states that no health care prof has to be involved if they object.

I have met GPs who won't refer women for a termination, and anaesthetists who won't do the anaesthetic.

It's absolutely normal. They find another member of staff instead. It's not just Catholics who may object to this.

Unless the pregnant woman having a termination thinks her medical care has been compromised as a result then it is none of her business.

PeanutButterCupCake · 18/01/2012 18:42

Sweeping generalisation there zzz

cookcleanerchaufferetc · 18/01/2012 18:49

Isn't it a case of if you can't do the job, don't do it!

YANBU .....

pranma · 18/01/2012 18:51

I believe they should be able to opt out of assisting in any way in a procedure which is contrary to their beliefs-most people wouldnt go into midfery expecting to have to help kill unborn babies.
However I also believe that they should be able to participate in care of the patient before and after the procedure and to do so with professionalism and compassion.

BadDayAtTheOrifice · 18/01/2012 18:55

I agree with pranma.

NormanTebbit · 18/01/2012 18:55

Wl thanks for that complete twaddle amazing insight Pranma

BadDayAtTheOrifice · 18/01/2012 18:57

I was once asked to care for a woman undergoing a late termination when I was the same amount of weeks pregnant myself at the time. I declined on that occasion. Should I leave my job now?

yellowraincoat · 18/01/2012 18:58

If you don't want to perform abortion after care, don't be a nurse. It is part of the job.

NormanTebbit · 18/01/2012 18:59

"help kill unborn babies" FFS