Royal College of Midwives backs abolition of abortion law that could see women terminate unborn child at any point

[ThatsMyStapler]

Surely the majority of people needing/wanting a medical abortion do so for very good reasons, and also as quickly as is possible.

Royal College of Midwives backs abolition of abortion law that could see women terminate unborn child at any point

Telegraph Link

he Royal College of Midwives (RCM) is facing criticism after calling for abortion to be decriminalised, without consulting its members on the issue.
The union, which represents almost 30,000 midwives and health workers, has said it gives its “full support” to the British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS), the UK’s biggest abortion provider, in its campaign for abortion to be removed from criminal law.
Prof Cathy Warwick, chief executive of the RCM, is also chairman of the board of trustees of BPAS.
It is currently against the law for women to terminate a foetus after 24 weeks unless there is a medical reason to do so, while abortions earlier in a pregnancy are only legal if two doctors agree to it.
But the RCM is backing calls for the legal limits to be scrapped and abortion to instead be regulated in the same way as other medical procedures, at the discretion of doctors.

There is a petition to stop this, and they say;

"Your campaign is severely out of touch with what women actually think and want. A ComRes poll in March 2014 found that 88% of women favoured a total and explicit ban on sex-selective abortion, whilst another in October that year registered a similar figure of 85%. The March poll also found 92% of women agreeing that a woman requesting an abortion should always be seen in person by a qualified doctor. Whilst in 2006, a Guardian / MORI poll found that 47% of women wanted a reduction in the upper time limit, a 2012 Angus Reid poll found this number had increased to 59% of women."

I would imagine that a HCP could refuse to participate if they morally disagrees with it? I don't know.

Yes HCPs can refuse to participate, and that right is protected in law.

Cathy Warwick may be right in what she is trying to achieve but that doesn't mean that the possibilities that this would open up are acceptable.

There is a lot of talk about trusting women in this debate but I think it's a red herring. We have laws in this country to protect the rights of anyone who has rights. Does that mean we don't trust the general population and suspect that they would all like to be out murdering and robbing each other blind? No, it doesn't. But we have the laws in place anyway because unfortunately there are times when we need them. Personally, I think most crimes are committed when people are desperate in one way or another and it is at times like those that the rights of other, equally deserving parties can be overlooked.

I don't trust anyone enough to do away with every law in society; I don't trust every mother and teacher in Britain enough not to have some laws in place that protect children from being abused by their parents and teachers. It doesn't mean that I have a generic distrust of parents and teachers. In the same way, we need laws protecting unborn children because although every adult has a right to do what they wish with their own body, for a short time during pregnancy there are two viable human beings involved there, not one. Although I do trust almost all women to do the best they can in the circumstances and I would support the primacy of her interests, I'm also not convinced that every woman in every circumstance is in a state of mind to act in a way that honours the rights of the life she is carrying as well as the life she is living. I'm also far from convinced that a woman contemplating late term abortion is going to be a better psychological place five years on if she goes ahead with it, not to mention the welfare of the nursing staff caught up in such a distressing situation - if any could be found to participate.

Also, having known some women who were under great psychological pressure from partners and family to abort in the early stages of pregnancy, I think the proposals could leave women open to a longer period of pressure to abort and possibly pressure to be part of DIY abortions if it became legal to have them. There is also the possibility that women in desperate enough circumstances would think 'abortion is abortion' and opt for late-term abortions without realising that this option could have a much greater long-term psychological impact than an early abortion, and I do not trust abortion providers to make this clear to them.

I absolutely do not support abortions based on gender alone, or want them to increase or become normal. But again, I don't think that criminalising women for making that decision is the answer. I also don't think that there would be very many cases where a woman would get to post-24 weeks, discover the gender, and then seek an abortion. In reality, a woman could access gender selective abortion now, by having early scan to determine gender and then requesting an abortion below the legal cut off.

Writer it's hard isn't it? Im finally in peace with my decision, but I won't forget. I think it was the best decision at the time, but it doesn't stop the guilt, hurt, regret. It was that abortion that made me realise that I needed to leave my abusive ex.

I don't think I can have another abortion again after that experience.

To have an abortion at a later term? No way I couldn't do it. If I did, it will indeed traumatise me.

Today 20:29 UnderTheGreenwoodTree

I would imagine that a HCP could refuse to participate if they morally disagrees with it? I don't know.

Yes HCPs can refuse to participate, and that right is protected in law.

............

True but... HCP can decline to participate directly or administer abortifacients; but cannot refuse to provide care.

Thus, you can decline to administer a pessary to induce labour (a TOP) but you cannot refuse to answer the call bell, go into the room, pick up the bedpan and poke through the blood and faeces to find the products of conception. Not can you refuse to answer an emergency bell, or to attend a birth of a baby. You are bound by a code of conduct and a contract.

So..... Don't join NHS ifyou don't want to care for women's reproductive choices. All their choices. Even the ones you find icky.

That's not really an opt out clause then agatha.

Nope!

you can't refuse to pick up the bedpan and poke through the blood and faeces to find the products of conception.

The fact that a person is forced to do that when they disagree with the whole concept actually worries me.

If you knew that you would have difficulties with it, presumably you wouldn't take a job working in that environment?

Oh okay. Well next time you have a medical procedure that I don't enjoy, I'll just refuse to treat you, shall I?!

Indeed Writer. Conscientious objection seems to count for very little.

But what happens to all the midwives who practice now and are willing to assist within the current laws surrounding abortion but don't agree with late term abortion?

Should they all just leave their job if this law is bought into place?

Maybe that's something else that should be considered, the effect of late term terminations on the staffing of the Clinic because I imagine a good few midwives would choose not to work in an environment where they are expected to hunt through blood and faeces to find the remains of an aborted 38 week old foetus...

'morally object to' and 'don't enjoy' are very different things Agatha.

Agatha - it's not about 'enjoying' the medical procedure, it's about the moral stance that a midwife may have.

I can't imagine there are many medical procedures that come even close to the moral dilemma of terminating a healthy foetus at 38 weeks.

In my eyes, such an act isn't even a 'procedure' - it's far more than that.

Agatha, 'morally object to' and 'don't enjoy' are very different things.

Sorry - computer froze!

Again, do you think there would be a huge demand for such late term abortions? To the extent that many midwives would need to consider whether they would be able to continue in their jobs?

Does it matter if there's a huge demand? Why should they even have the risk of having to carry out one?

Being expected to do it even once would make me leave my job if I was being forced to participate in late term abortions.

But thankfully, I'm not a midwife so searching for parts of aborted viable and healthy babies isn't something I will ever have to be faced with.

"So..... Don't join NHS ifyou don't want to care for women's reproductive choices. All their choices. Even the ones you find icky."

You know it's more than just a bit icky. To describe murder as icky is a bit of an understatement. Many religious groups would be opposed to late term abortion. Many religious groups believe that those who carry out late abortions will punished in the after life for eternity.

So you would ban devout Muslims, Christians, Jews, Hindus, Seikhs from working for the NHS. I imagine that late term abortion without medical grounds would even make some hardline atheists uncomfortable.

You might find there are no doctors or midwives left.

I'm not suggesting that midwives would have to help after a procedure they're not comfortable with! I'm pointing out that in reality the situation would still be very rare, and there would presumably be only a few places where it would be carried out. The vast majority of midwives wouldn't be affected.

As Agatha points out, terminating a pregnancy at 30+ weeks pregnant is extremely rare.

Maybe we should refocus the discussion to experiences which are very common and the BPAS and RCM are trying to decriminalise ie any woman who terminates a pregnancy at any stage without the consent of two doctors is open to prosecution.

Women who have late terminations aren't gleeful baby killers who make a decision to abort on a whim. They're people like me, like you, like your sister, like your daughter who find themselves pregnant in a situation where they are prevented from accessing help (eg domestic abuse), don't realise they're pregnant (eg contraceptive failure) or have tried to deny the pregnancy (eg have been raped, are under the age of consent and/or terrified to tell parents).

"Maybe that's something else that should be considered, the effect of late term terminations on the staffing of the Clinic because I imagine a good few midwives would choose not to work in an environment where they are expected to hunt through blood and faeces to find the remains of an aborted 38 week old foetus..."

A 38 week foetus will look like a newborn. It will not get lost in a bedpan of blood and faeces. I doubt that many live newborn babies in a bed pan.

Why does the baby have to be 'terminated' though. If it can survive shouldn't they try to deliver it alive. Then put it up for adoption of the other doesn't want it.

*mother