Hundreds of women have to travel miles out of Oxfordshire for an abortion because county NHS doctors will not carry out the procedure.
About four fifths of the 2,000 NHS terminations performed on Oxfordshire women every year are carried out in Reading or London by family planning organisation Marie Stopes, it has emerged.
The Oxfordshire Radcliffe Hospitals NHS Trust sub-contracts the majority of operations to Marie Stopes to prevent a potential backlog when doctors exercise their legal right not to perform term- inations.
advertisement
It means only abortions for girls under 16 or women with health problems associated with pregnancy are carried out at Oxford's John Radcliffe and The Horton in Banbury. In all other cases, county women have to travel up to 75 miles to get to a clinic for their procedure, and be expected to return home the same day.
A Radcliffe Hospitals spokesman said new groups of doctors joined gynaecology for training every six months and could choose to refuse to carry out abortions for ethical reasons.
Doctors or nurses could refuse to be involved in abortions on moral, scientific or religious grounds, but did not have to state a reason. The spokesman said: "We do not know what the views of our junior doctors will be every six months."
The situation only became public after West Oxfordshire district councillor Dave King was told a father had travelled down to Ealing with his pregnant 15-year-old daughter.
He said: "If the mums are under 15 it cannot do them much good being sent out of the county to have an abortion, or for their parents who have to take them to London to have it carried out. It should happen locally.
"From what I can gather, the abortions are not being done in Oxfordshire because of the ethical beliefs of staff. I am a bit annoyed. It is the principle of it - people dictating what they are going to do work-wise. I feel if they work for the NHS they should be prepared to carry out these procedures."
The ORH spokesman said the scheme had been in place for several years but could not give a precise time.
The most recent statistics, for 2005, showed that 183 girls aged under 18 in Oxfordshire had abortions, out of 390 conceived that year.
Mark Bhagwandin, spokesman for the anti-abortion group Life, said: "I do understand the objections of doctors, and more coming into the field are going to raise this conscientious objection because the science proves beyond doubt that a baby in the womb is a human being.
"Women thinking about abortion are extremely confused and in crisis. If they have to travel a few hundred miles that's not going to help."
Other NHS trusts in the Thames Valley have similar procedures.
People shouldn't become doctors if there are certain procedures they don't approve of. As well as this story I've also heard of pharmacists who won't sell the morning after pill to women who want it. It's a disgrace that these people are in the job to start with. It's not the doctors' job to let their moral judgement cloud how they treat their patients,I can't believe they have a legal right not to perform abortion to start with. Don't work in Gynae if you don't want to do them!!!
People shouldn't become doctors if there are certain procedures they don't approve of. As well as this story I've also heard of pharmacists who won't sell the morning after pill to women who want it. It's a disgrace that these people are in the job to start with. It's not the doctors' job to let their moral judgement cloud how they treat their patients,I can't believe they have a legal right not to perform abortion to start with. Don't work in Gynae if you don't want to do them!!!
Posted by: Nomikos, South Africa on 7:36am Fri 29 Feb 08
Doctors and nurses should not be required to participate in a procedure that they regard as morally wrong. Besides, embryology textbooks across the globe recognizes that the life of a human being starts at conception. Does it then not follow that the average doctors regards abortion as murder?
Doctors and nurses should not be required to participate in a procedure that they regard as morally wrong. Besides, embryology textbooks across the globe recognizes that the life of a human being starts at conception. Does it then not follow that the average doctors regards abortion as murder?
[quote][bold]Nomikos[/bold] wrote:
Doctors and nurses should not be required to participate in a procedure that they regard as morally wrong. Besides, embryology textbooks across the globe recognizes that the life of a human being starts at conception. Does it then not follow that the average doctors regards abortion as murder?[/quote] Er - yes they should be required to participate in procedures when it is tax payers money that keeps them in their jobs and tax payers money that has enabled them to train to do those jobs......
And besides which, if they can find it morally ok to help drug addicts (who bring their addictions on themselves) then they can and should help a woman if she finds herself with an unwanted pregnancy.
Nomikos wrote:
Doctors and nurses should not be required to participate in a procedure that they regard as morally wrong. Besides, embryology textbooks across the globe recognizes that the life of a human being starts at conception. Does it then not follow that the average doctors regards abortion as murder?
Er - yes they should be required to participate in procedures when it is tax payers money that keeps them in their jobs and tax payers money that has enabled them to train to do those jobs......
And besides which, if they can find it morally ok to help drug addicts (who bring their addictions on themselves) then they can and should help a woman if she finds herself with an unwanted pregnancy.
[quote]And besides which, if they can find it morally ok to help drug addicts (who bring their addictions on themselves) then they can and should help a woman if she finds herself with an unwanted pregnancy.[/quote]
Come on. My friends have had abortions and my girlfriend has had to take the morning after pill (failed contraception) but it's hardly something that happens by magic. Like drug users, people have to take pro-active steps to get pregnant. I support the right of doctors to have a choice in the matter, as long as they're doing other work instead - everyone should have the right to refuse to do work if they're genuinely uncomfortable doing it.
Some of the backlog could be solved by having much more frank, open sex education at school - mine consisted of shifting in my seat while we were shown diagrams of ovaries that are no use at all in real life. Kids are going to have sex, but they should also have practical knowledge of how to minimise the risk of STDs and pregnancy.
And besides which, if they can find it morally ok to help drug addicts (who bring their addictions on themselves) then they can and should help a woman if she finds herself with an unwanted pregnancy.
Come on. My friends have had abortions and my girlfriend has had to take the morning after pill (failed contraception) but it's hardly something that happens by magic. Like drug users, people have to take pro-active steps to get pregnant. I support the right of doctors to have a choice in the matter, as long as they're doing other work instead - everyone should have the right to refuse to do work if they're genuinely uncomfortable doing it.
Some of the backlog could be solved by having much more frank, open sex education at school - mine consisted of shifting in my seat while we were shown diagrams of ovaries that are no use at all in real life. Kids are going to have sex, but they should also have practical knowledge of how to minimise the risk of STDs and pregnancy.
[quote][bold]JD[/bold] wrote:
Absolutely agree with you Clare. The sooner doctors realize that they are there to serve ALL people (whether they agree with them or not) the better. [/quote] DOCTORS ARE NOT THERE TO DECIDE WHAT OUR MORALS SHOULD BE BUT TO DO THE JOB THEY ARE WELL PAID FOR.THEY ARE NOT GODSAND SHOULDNT BE DOCTORS IF IT CONFLICTS WITH THEIR BELIEFS
JD wrote:
Absolutely agree with you Clare. The sooner doctors realize that they are there to serve ALL people (whether they agree with them or not) the better.
DOCTORS ARE NOT THERE TO DECIDE WHAT OUR MORALS SHOULD BE BUT TO DO THE JOB THEY ARE WELL PAID FOR.THEY ARE NOT GODSAND SHOULDNT BE DOCTORS IF IT CONFLICTS WITH THEIR BELIEFS
Posted by: SO and SP, witney on 4:13pm Fri 29 Feb 08
We would be interested to know the age, sex and religious background of these 'new doctors' joining gynae every 6 months. Surely, if they are agreeing to work for the NHS, paid by tax-payers money, then they should be required to perform all procedures offered by the NHS? There are many reasons why a woman might require an abortion, and the moralising of individuals within a publicly funded organisation is repugnant and misogynistic in the extreme. Let them seek employment where their morals rest easy, not inflict them on women who are already operating within a society which judges them, whatever they do, from work, to motherhood, to making choices about how they live. Do the job or go away and leave us alone!
We would be interested to know the age, sex and religious background of these 'new doctors' joining gynae every 6 months. Surely, if they are agreeing to work for the NHS, paid by tax-payers money, then they should be required to perform all procedures offered by the NHS? There are many reasons why a woman might require an abortion, and the moralising of individuals within a publicly funded organisation is repugnant and misogynistic in the extreme. Let them seek employment where their morals rest easy, not inflict them on women who are already operating within a society which judges them, whatever they do, from work, to motherhood, to making choices about how they live. Do the job or go away and leave us alone!
Posted by: Phil Gale, Oxford on 4:43pm Fri 29 Feb 08
The doctors' freedom of conscience is really important.
If, knowing all that they do (being highly trained) about conception, embryo development, the psychological issues involved in keeping or terminating the pregnancy, they can look a distressed patient in the eye and say "no", then they've got to have a pretty well-worked-out set of reasons. You have to respect that.
The doctors' freedom of conscience is really important.
If, knowing all that they do (being highly trained) about conception, embryo development, the psychological issues involved in keeping or terminating the pregnancy, they can look a distressed patient in the eye and say "no", then they've got to have a pretty well-worked-out set of reasons. You have to respect that.
This is not a problem restricted to Gynae nurses and doctors.
Before a patient can be referred for an abortion, she has to get a form signed by her GP. Many GP's refuse to sign the forms on morality grounds due to religious beliefs.
If Dr's want to be paid by the NHS/PCT's for their work then they do not have a choice. If they want the choice, then let them take up private medicine.
Many of the current GP partnerships in Oxford are run by people with strong to extreme religious beliefs. It doesn't stop them ensuring they maximise their earnings by excluding colleagues from partnerships as well. Many are choosing to employ GP employees on much lower salaries for the same work. And we expect them to pick and choose their morality.
This is not a problem restricted to Gynae nurses and doctors.
Before a patient can be referred for an abortion, she has to get a form signed by her GP. Many GP's refuse to sign the forms on morality grounds due to religious beliefs.
If Dr's want to be paid by the NHS/PCT's for their work then they do not have a choice. If they want the choice, then let them take up private medicine.
Many of the current GP partnerships in Oxford are run by people with strong to extreme religious beliefs. It doesn't stop them ensuring they maximise their earnings by excluding colleagues from partnerships as well. Many are choosing to employ GP employees on much lower salaries for the same work. And we expect them to pick and choose their morality.
Here's another thought to throw into the mix: Most abortions are elective. If a woman believes in freedom of choice, she should not demand that her doctor perform an elective procedure that offends him or her on the deepest personal level.
Here's another thought to throw into the mix: Most abortions are elective. If a woman believes in freedom of choice, she should not demand that her doctor perform an elective procedure that offends him or her on the deepest personal level.
Posted by: ernie, France, but born, not aborted in Oxford on 6:02pm Fri 29 Feb 08
Quite right Ian. I have no idea or not whether Councillor Dave King has a conscience about anything, but if he does, I would not expect him to drop his principles for money, after all, he is a politician and they just do not behave like that.
Abortion is the deliberate killing of an unborn child. No amount of specious reasoning will alter that truth. It is wrong, wrong, wrong.
ernie
Quite right Ian. I have no idea or not whether Councillor Dave King has a conscience about anything, but if he does, I would not expect him to drop his principles for money, after all, he is a politician and they just do not behave like that.
Abortion is the deliberate killing of an unborn child. No amount of specious reasoning will alter that truth. It is wrong, wrong, wrong.
Posted by: Mary, Headington on 11:05pm Fri 29 Feb 08
Cllr Dave King complains that it can't do girls of 15 much good being sent out of the county to have abortions and compalins that parenst have to accom-pany them to London for the operation. perhaps he should consider whether it is actually good for girls this young to be engaged in unprotected sex at such a young age. Perhaps if parents showed a little more moral authority and taught their children that promiscuous sex does them no good because of possible unwanted pregancies and sexually transmitted diseases they'd be doing a better job of care for their children. There's a lot of talk about the cost to teh tax payer of doctors exercising their conscience. Pity nobody mentions the cost to the tax payer of carrying out all these abortions and then later paying for infertility treatment as a result of STDs.
Cllr Dave King complains that it can't do girls of 15 much good being sent out of the county to have abortions and compalins that parenst have to accom-pany them to London for the operation. perhaps he should consider whether it is actually good for girls this young to be engaged in unprotected sex at such a young age. Perhaps if parents showed a little more moral authority and taught their children that promiscuous sex does them no good because of possible unwanted pregancies and sexually transmitted diseases they'd be doing a better job of care for their children. There's a lot of talk about the cost to teh tax payer of doctors exercising their conscience. Pity nobody mentions the cost to the tax payer of carrying out all these abortions and then later paying for infertility treatment as a result of STDs.
Posted by: Dave King, Carterton. on 1:10am Sat 1 Mar 08
As a District Councillor, I along with other Council members are often asked questions to which we don't have the answer. In order to obtain answers we need to investigate matters further. This discussion seems to have turned into a debate about Anti and pro Abortions whereas we should be concentrating on the LEGAL RIGHTS of Doctors and Nurses not to carry out certain procedures due to their moral, scientific or religious beliefs. Terminations are just one procedure. By investigating more deeply we may find clinical staff refusing to treat Aids patients, refusing to carry out blood transfusions or even refusing to insert Pigs heart valves into human hearts. (A little far fetched I know), however, it would be interesting to find out if the ethical beliefs of our Doctors and Nurses are put above the health and wellbeing of the patients!!!!! Just a thought!!!!
As a District Councillor, I along with other Council members are often asked questions to which we don't have the answer. In order to obtain answers we need to investigate matters further. This discussion seems to have turned into a debate about Anti and pro Abortions whereas we should be concentrating on the LEGAL RIGHTS of Doctors and Nurses not to carry out certain procedures due to their moral, scientific or religious beliefs. Terminations are just one procedure. By investigating more deeply we may find clinical staff refusing to treat Aids patients, refusing to carry out blood transfusions or even refusing to insert Pigs heart valves into human hearts. (A little far fetched I know), however, it would be interesting to find out if the ethical beliefs of our Doctors and Nurses are put above the health and wellbeing of the patients!!!!! Just a thought!!!!
I suppose its all a part of the libertarian freedom to choose bullshit.
If your doctor won't perform a proceedure on moral grounds, tough titty find one that will.
No doubt we will be issued with catalogues detailing the "special services" various GPs will offer to us consumers.
Bah, humbug.
I suppose its all a part of the libertarian freedom to choose bullshit.
If your doctor won't perform a proceedure on moral grounds, tough titty find one that will.
No doubt we will be issued with catalogues detailing the "special services" various GPs will offer to us consumers.
I think this article shows a small glimmer of hope that finally Drs are seeing abortion for what it truly is - the deliberate killing of an unborn child.
How can the killing of unborn babies be clssified as 'health care' [quote]quote[/quote] anyway? 190,000 abortions a year must add up to quite a hefty amount to pay for innocent lives, who would have been, incidentally, our future,
I think this article shows a small glimmer of hope that finally Drs are seeing abortion for what it truly is - the deliberate killing of an unborn child.
How can the killing of unborn babies be clssified as 'health care'
quote
anyway? 190,000 abortions a year must add up to quite a hefty amount to pay for innocent lives, who would have been, incidentally, our future,
I give my unreserved support for doctors with the moral fibre to stand up for truth and honesty. What can be more true and honest than the fact that killing a living human being is murder, and should be treated as such.
I give my unreserved support for doctors with the moral fibre to stand up for truth and honesty. What can be more true and honest than the fact that killing a living human being is murder, and should be treated as such.
Posted by: Patrick McKay, Ampthill, Beds. on 9:18am Tue 4 Mar 08
An unborn child at only two months gestation already has fingerprints i.e. a [italic]legal identity[/italic].
Despite this, it is legal to butcher them right up until birth in some cases.
As somebody once said...'the law is an ****'.....
An unborn child at only two months gestation already has fingerprints i.e. a legal identity.
Despite this, it is legal to butcher them right up until birth in some cases.
Having said that I am of the opinion that it should be an emergencies only proceedure and not a libetarian right to choose/child as fashion accessory one.
Having said that I am of the opinion that it should be an emergencies only proceedure and not a libetarian right to choose/child as fashion accessory one.
Posted by: Patrick McKay, Ampthill, Beds. on 10:56am Tue 4 Mar 08
You are obviously unaware that only some 0.05% of abortions are carried out on the grounds of 'rape'. Around 97% are carried out for so-called 'social reasons' i.e. where there is nothing 'wrong' with the baby and no danger to the mother's health. I am not in any way condoning rape, which is a despicable crime. However, it is said that 'hard cases make bad laws' - and the 1967 Abortion Act is a classic example.
You are obviously unaware that only some 0.05% of abortions are carried out on the grounds of 'rape'. Around 97% are carried out for so-called 'social reasons' i.e. where there is nothing 'wrong' with the baby and no danger to the mother's health. I am not in any way condoning rape, which is a despicable crime. However, it is said that 'hard cases make bad laws' - and the 1967 Abortion Act is a classic example.
Alan Page,
As a victim of violent rape at 16yrs old I can tell you in NO uncertain terms that two wrongs do NOT make a right. Even though this discussion it not about the almost non-exsistant amount of abortions due to rape, I utterly resent it when people bring this into the pro-life/pro-choice argument. There was NO way on earth i would have killed a baby had I become pregnant. The fact is after being so violently assaulted, the women's/child's body usually is too traumatised for a baby to survive. Still, as I said, this is not the time nor place to be discussing this. Just makes me so mad! Abortion is wrong and that's the end line.[bold]bold[/bold]
Alan Page,
As a victim of violent rape at 16yrs old I can tell you in NO uncertain terms that two wrongs do NOT make a right. Even though this discussion it not about the almost non-exsistant amount of abortions due to rape, I utterly resent it when people bring this into the pro-life/pro-choice argument. There was NO way on earth i would have killed a baby had I become pregnant. The fact is after being so violently assaulted, the women's/child's body usually is too traumatised for a baby to survive. Still, as I said, this is not the time nor place to be discussing this. Just makes me so mad! Abortion is wrong and that's the end line.
Patrick McKay - Sorry, i forgot to add in my comment above, thank you for your comments re rape & abortion. The amount of abortions done from rape are so minimal, and the added trauma for a women to then go ahead and kill her baby is overwhelming.
A.L
Patrick McKay - Sorry, i forgot to add in my comment above, thank you for your comments re rape & abortion. The amount of abortions done from rape are so minimal, and the added trauma for a women to then go ahead and kill her baby is overwhelming.
A.L
Posted by: Patrick McKay, Ampthill, Beds. on 10:47am Wed 5 Mar 08
It is in fact 'highly carcinogenic' to have a first pregnancy aborted, according to recently published data. The abortion-breast cancer (ABC) link has actually been known about since [italic]1957[/italic]. Why are women never told?
It is in fact 'highly carcinogenic' to have a first pregnancy aborted, according to recently published data. The abortion-breast cancer (ABC) link has actually been known about since 1957. Why are women never told?
Posted by: gljones, Flintshire on 12:16pm Thu 6 Mar 08
How can a person who has gone into medicine to save life and help the living be expected to take the life of a helpless but healthy baby in the womb? The developing foetus is not an 'it' but a human being that by receiving the nurture of the mother in the womb will come to independence of existence. Having an abortion does not leave the woman in a 'neutral' position ie after abortion it is as though she has never had a pregnancy. There may be psychological and physical effects which will show themselves in time to come.
How can a person who has gone into medicine to save life and help the living be expected to take the life of a helpless but healthy baby in the womb? The developing foetus is not an 'it' but a human being that by receiving the nurture of the mother in the womb will come to independence of existence. Having an abortion does not leave the woman in a 'neutral' position ie after abortion it is as though she has never had a pregnancy. There may be psychological and physical effects which will show themselves in time to come.
Posted by: WENDYWALKER, LUTON on 11:02am Fri 7 Mar 08
IF ONLY PEOPLE REALISED WHAT IS GOING ON IN THE REPRODUCTIVE WORLD THAT NOW PUTS FRANKENSTEIN TO SHAME THEY WOULD FAINT IN PARLIAMENT RIGHT NOW IS A BILL TO ALLOW ANIMAL /HUMAN HYBRIDS TO BE CREATED ,MORE LIBERAL ABORTION IS 200,000 NOT ENOUGH ANNUALLY ,?THE REMOVAL OF THE NEED FOR FATHERS ON BIRTH CERTIFICATES ,AND INCREASED USE OF EMBRYOS IN STEM CELL RESEARCH ...HARD TO BELIEVE THEN GO TO WWW.PASSIONFORLIFE.O
RG.UK ?PASS THE SMELLING SALTS .OUR STYGIAN COUNTRY HAS GONE DOWN THE DRAIN WHEN IT COMES TO THE SANCTITY AND DIGNITY OF ALL HUMAN LIFE
IF ONLY PEOPLE REALISED WHAT IS GOING ON IN THE REPRODUCTIVE WORLD THAT NOW PUTS FRANKENSTEIN TO SHAME THEY WOULD FAINT IN PARLIAMENT RIGHT NOW IS A BILL TO ALLOW ANIMAL /HUMAN HYBRIDS TO BE CREATED ,MORE LIBERAL ABORTION IS 200,000 NOT ENOUGH ANNUALLY ,?THE REMOVAL OF THE NEED FOR FATHERS ON BIRTH CERTIFICATES ,AND INCREASED USE OF EMBRYOS IN STEM CELL RESEARCH ...HARD TO BELIEVE THEN GO TO WWW.PASSIONFORLIFE.O
RG.UK ?PASS THE SMELLING SALTS .OUR STYGIAN COUNTRY HAS GONE DOWN THE DRAIN WHEN IT COMES TO THE SANCTITY AND DIGNITY OF ALL HUMAN LIFE
The deliberate killing of the innocent unborn at whatever age of gestation is an horrendous act of extreme violence. We arenot talking about pulling teeth here, but of what is a brutal killing, in a country that forbids capital punishment. Oxford is fortunate in employing medical and nursing staff who respect the sanctity of human life.
The deliberate killing of the innocent unborn at whatever age of gestation is an horrendous act of extreme violence. We arenot talking about pulling teeth here, but of what is a brutal killing, in a country that forbids capital punishment. Oxford is fortunate in employing medical and nursing staff who respect the sanctity of human life.
Posted by: WENDY WALKER wendy_walker, Luton on 6:53pm Sat 8 Mar 08
THERE IS A WONDERFUL SAYING THAT A DR MAY BE ABLE TO SCRAPE A CHILD FROM ITS MOTHERS WOMB ,BUT IT CAN NEVER BE SCRAPED FROM HER MIND ...HENCE THE HUGE AMOUNT OF POST ABORTION TRAUMA WE ARE CURRENTLY WITNESSING
THERE IS A WONDERFUL SAYING THAT A DR MAY BE ABLE TO SCRAPE A CHILD FROM ITS MOTHERS WOMB ,BUT IT CAN NEVER BE SCRAPED FROM HER MIND ...HENCE THE HUGE AMOUNT OF POST ABORTION TRAUMA WE ARE CURRENTLY WITNESSING
I had an abortion at the JR in 2002. I wasn't happy about it but it was the right choice for me AT THAT TIME. I have to be brutally honest and say I don't regret it at all. The doctors who treated me were very nice and I didn't feel judged at all.
I had an abortion at the JR in 2002. I wasn't happy about it but it was the right choice for me AT THAT TIME. I have to be brutally honest and say I don't regret it at all. The doctors who treated me were very nice and I didn't feel judged at all.
Posted by: Patrick McKay, Ampthill, Beds. on 1:16pm Mon 10 Mar 08
A study carried out by Dr Patrick Carroll, a statistician and actuary, recently showed that abortion is the 'best predictor' of breast cancer trends.
He expects an overall increase of 50.9% in the cancer rate in England and Wales by 2029.
What about those who find themselves in need of mastectomy in years to come - will they be pleased with themselves for having exercised their 'right-to-choose'?
In Australia, a woman has already sued her abortion provider for failing to warn her about the ABC-link. The first of many, as we shall see.
A study carried out by Dr Patrick Carroll, a statistician and actuary, recently showed that abortion is the 'best predictor' of breast cancer trends.
He expects an overall increase of 50.9% in the cancer rate in England and Wales by 2029.
What about those who find themselves in need of mastectomy in years to come - will they be pleased with themselves for having exercised their 'right-to-choose'?
In Australia, a woman has already sued her abortion provider for failing to warn her about the ABC-link. The first of many, as we shall see.
Post-abortion trauma is a recognised and serious condition. It may not be diagnosed until 5, 10, 20 yrs after her abortion, but studies have shown abortions have devastating consequences. The mere fact that Drs/Nurses are now shying away from taking part in the abortion industry shows they no longer want to be part of the hoax, which is what abortion is. Abortion is NOT and never will be a CHOICE. As pro-lifers we don't just care for the baby and not the Mother, it is because we DO care for both of them that we want to show abortion for what it truly is - devastating for all the family, Mother, Father, Grandparents. People are geting fuffled because they don't like to be reminded of what we are doing in our hospitals, GP surgeries and schools.
Post-abortion trauma is a recognised and serious condition. It may not be diagnosed until 5, 10, 20 yrs after her abortion, but studies have shown abortions have devastating consequences. The mere fact that Drs/Nurses are now shying away from taking part in the abortion industry shows they no longer want to be part of the hoax, which is what abortion is. Abortion is NOT and never will be a CHOICE. As pro-lifers we don't just care for the baby and not the Mother, it is because we DO care for both of them that we want to show abortion for what it truly is - devastating for all the family, Mother, Father, Grandparents. People are geting fuffled because they don't like to be reminded of what we are doing in our hospitals, GP surgeries and schools.
Posted by: Simon Icke, Aston Clinton BUCKS on 9:49am Mon 19 May 08
As a nation we are only as civilised as the way we treat the most vulnerable among us. No one is more vulnerable and more undervalued in our society than the unborn human child.
Have we become so selfish, so callous that we just don't care any more? More than 97 per cent of the 200,000 plus abortions carried out every year in Britain are for social reasons only. How very sad.
As a nation we are only as civilised as the way we treat the most vulnerable among us. No one is more vulnerable and more undervalued in our society than the unborn human child.
Have we become so selfish, so callous that we just don't care any more? More than 97 per cent of the 200,000 plus abortions carried out every year in Britain are for social reasons only. How very sad.
If you liked this article and would like to share it with others on the web who might be searching for good content we've made it easy for you to do it.
At the bottom of all articles, you'll see links to six sites. These sites - commonly called 'social bookmark' or 'social news' sites - have large communities of web users who share and rate interesting, useful and fun things on the web.
Clicking the links will automatically add the address of the story you are reading to one of these sites, letting you share it with others. Each site will ask you to register to share stories. Registration is free and once a member, you can store, recommend and search for stories that interest you.
Print
Email this
Comment
