UK: les médecins refusent de plus en plus de pratiquer des avortements.

LONDON, April 16, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) 

Le Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) vient de faire savoir qu’il se pourrait qu’il devienne difficile de trouver des gynécologues qui répondent aux demandes d’avortement. Nombreux sont les médecins qui, pour des raisons éthiques ou d’objection de conscience, refusent aujourd’hui l’interruption de grossesse.

Il y a chaque année 190.000 avortements au Royaume Uni.

Il est aussi question dans l’article des politiques d’éducation sexuelle des jeunes, qui, malgré un large financement ne donnent pas les résultats attendus : le nombre de grossesses indésirées ne cessent d’augmenter.

Since the institution of widespread "sex education" programs in schools and the free availability of contraceptives, Britain's rate of pregnancy among teenagers has skyrocketed to become the highest in Europe.   

Responding to an article in the Independent, the RCOG called abortion an "essential part of women's healthcare services." Recent statistics show Britain's abortion levels at an all time high and one in three women in Britain will have an abortion during her lifetime. 

Kate Guthrie, an abortionist and spokesperson on family planning for the RCOG told the Independent, "There is an increasing number of young doctors who are not participating in the training. The college and the Department of Health are really worried." 

Richard Warren, honorary secretary of the RCOG and a consultant obstetrician in Norfolk, said, "In the past, abortion was an accepted part of the workload. People did not like it but they accepted that it was in the best interests of the woman concerned." 

He added, "There is an ethos that people go into medicine to save lives and look after people. Usually, a decision for termination is taken reluctantly even though it is recognised that it is in the best interests of the woman. It is difficult and upsetting work and it is done with obvious reticence. We are seeing more doctors who are reluctant to be involved in the process and this is happening in the context of growing demand." 

This is good news to the pro-life leadership of Britain who said, "We are pleased to hear that an increasing number of medical staff are refusing to perform abortions, but this situation is being talked up by those who want nurses or other non-doctors to perform abortion." 

John Smeaton, head of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children pointed to a recent examination by health experts of Britain's abortion law that showed it was legal for nurses and midwives to abort babies. "I do hope the profession is coming to realise the profound contradiction between its caring and life-preserving role, and the act of destruction of innocent human lives." 

Smeaton added, "Maybe after the six and a half million children who have died since legalisation 40 years ago, and countless mothers hurt by their abortion experience, we are finally seeing abortion for the social horror that it is." 

Since the 1990s, the Faculty of Family Planning and the RCOG has included a conscientious objection clause for health staff who refuse abortion on religious or moral grounds. But Smeaton warns that doctors and nurses opting out still suffer "immense pressure to refer women and girls to colleagues who will perform terminations."  http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/mar/07032710.html