Parents of a child with Down Syndrome have been awarded $2.9 million (U.S.) damages on the grounds that they would have aborted her had the condition been diagnosed during pregnancy. The award is based on the estimated extra lifetime costs of caring for someone with Down syndrome. [ABC News]
Category: Abortion
Scottish judge rules objecting midwives can be forced to facilitate abortions
Two Catholic midwives who brought suit against National Health Services Greater Glasgow and Clyde have lost the case in the Court of Session. The judge ruled that midwives, while expected to supervise and direct staff providing abortions, were not required to directly participate in the procedure, and were “sufficiently removed” from the procedures that their beliefs had been appropriately accommodated. Nonetheless, the judge did acknowledge that they were causally connected, but ruled that the protection of conscience clause in the Abortion Act (1967) must be interpreted to refer only to direct participation.
Statement by Glasgow midwives after abortion judgment
NEWS RELEASE
29 February 2012, 17:15
The two Glasgow midwives at the centre of today’s court judgment on conscientious objection to abortion have made the following statement:
Miss Mary Doogan said:
“Connie [Wood] and I are both very disappointed and greatly saddened by today’s verdict.
“For most of our 20-plus years of employment as midwifery sisters at the Southern General Hospital we have been proud to be associated with a maternity unit in which the right of all midwifery staff to freedom of conscience has been acknowledged, protected and upheld with no detrimental outcome to any mother whatsoever.
“Neither Connie nor I stand in judgement of any woman who chooses to terminate her pregnancy for whatever reasons. We are more than aware of the difficult choices that some expectant mothers may be faced with in a crisis pregnancy.
“However, in holding to the view that life should be protected from conception to natural death, neither do we wish to be judged for exercising what is our legal right to refuse to participate in the process of medical termination of pregnancy.
“We wish now to take some time to consider all options that are available to us (including appeal) before making any further comment.”
Notes for editors:
Since both women remain employees of the health board they are not in a position to make further comment or give interviews.
The Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC) has supported the midwives in bringing their case, underwriting their legal costs, and will now be considering their further legal options with them. Please see SPUC’s release of earlier today and of 17 January.SPUC’s communications department can be contacted on:
- mobile: 07939 177683
- direct dial: 020 7820 3129
- email: news@spuc.org.uk
- Twitter: @spucprolife
President of Spanish medical college won’t accept government pressure on abortion
Dr. Carmen Rodriguez, the president of the Asturias Medical College, the official physician’s association for the region of Asturias in the north of Spain, told a local paper that society can make laws concerning abortion, but cannot force physicians to participate in them. [LifeSite News]
Objecting Spanish physician granted injunction
Dr. Manuel Resa, a physician who has resisted attempts to force him to participate in abortions, has been granted an injunction by Superior Tribunal of the Autonomous Community of Andalusia in Spain. He appealed to the Tribunal after a lower court refused to grant the injunction. This means that Dr. Resa will not be forced to participate in abortion pending the outcome of his civil suit on seeking recognition of his freedom to refuse to facilitate abortion.