|
Pro-life doctor exposes bias of
RCOG's latest abortion consultation
Editor’s note. This appeared
today on the blog of John Smeaton, executive director of the
Society the Protection of Unborn Children [SPUC] at
http://spuc-director.blogspot.com/2011/02/pro-life-doctor-exposes-bias-of-rcogs.html
“The faster they come, the less
they are publicised and the shorter the deadlines – meaning that
it is less and less possible to make an intelligent response
within the specified time frame. Is this some kind of plot to
wave through controversial policy quietly whilst appearing take
notice of stakeholders’ opinions? That is certainly the
impression created.”
This is how Dr. Peter Saunders of
the Christian Medical Fellowship has described the latest
consultation of the RCOG (Royal College of Obstetricians and
Gynaecologists) which is revising its controversial document
‘The Care of Women Requesting Induced Abortion’, first published
in 2000, revised in 2004, and now undergoing its current
revision.
The consultation is open to every
person and organisation with an interest in this topic. The
closing date for submissions is 18 February. Details at
http://www.familyandlife.org/Abortion-and-Embryo/2120/9/14.html.
There is more information about
the consultation document(s) on the RCOG website.
Dr. Saunders notes the ubiquitous
presence of BPAS [British Pregnancy Advisory Service] and Marie
Stopes International [two abortion “providers”], in
collaboration with their pro-abortion colleagues within the RCOG
and its faculty of sexual and reproductive health.
Dr. Saunders also notes the
further inadequacy of the review panel by its failure to include
any psychiatrist in its composition. Perhaps the recent change
of position by The Royal College of Psychiatrists over the issue
of abortion and mental illness, which it now recognises, has
something to do with it?
Among the draft document’s
recommendations, or rather ideological tenets, are the
following:
"Women should be informed that
induced abortion is not associated with an increase in breast
cancer; Women should be informed that there are no proven
associations between induced abortion and subsequent ectopic
pregnancy, placenta praevia or infertility; Women should be
informed that induced abortion is associated with a small
increase in risk of subsequent preterm birth, which increases
with the number of abortions; Women should be informed that most
women who have abortions do not experience adverse psychological
sequelae."
These claims are an egregious
attempt to dismiss or ignore the significant body of evidence
that contradicts each of the points made by the RCOG. Dr.
Saunders provides one pertinent example offered by the American
Association of Pro Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists on the
link between abortion and pre-term birth.... |