THE Royal College of Midwives has welcomed a landmark Supreme Court ruling against two Catholic midwives who refused to support colleagues carrying out abortions.

 

The UK's highest court upheld an appeal by NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde against a Scottish court ruling which could have allowed staff to refuse to carry out any duties at all related to terminations.

Mary Doogan, from Garrowhill in Glasgow, and Connie Wood, from Clarkston in East Renfrewshire, were employed as labour ward co-ordinators at the Southern General Hospital in Glasgow.

They believed their right to conscientious objection was breached by being asked to answer telephone calls to book women in for care or supervise other staff.

They previously won their case at the Court of Session in Edinburgh.

But NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde's appeal said the right to abstain should only extend to treatment ending a pregnancy.

The RCM and the British Preganancy Advisory Service (BPAS) intervened in the case claiming that it could seriously jeopardise women's care.

The 1967 Abortion Act includes a clause that allows healthcare professionals to refuse to participate in abortion care, provided it is not an emergency situation.

However the Supreme Court judges said parliament was likely to have envisaged that right to object as being restricted to "actually taking part, that is actually performing that tasks involved in the course of treatment."

Lady Hale, Deputy President of the court, said: "Parliament will not have had in mind the hospital managers who decide to offer an abortion service, the administrators who decide how best that service can be organised within the hospital, the caterers who provide the patients with food and the cleaners who provide them with a safe and hygienic environment.

"Yet all may be said in some way to be facilitating the carrying out of the treatment involved.

"The managerial and supervisory tasks carried out by the labour ward co-ordinators are closer to these roles than they are to the role of providing the treatment which brings about the termination of the pregnancy.

"Participate" in my view means taking part in a "hands-on" capacity."

A spokeswoman for NHSGGC said: "We are pleased with the judgement from the Supreme Court."

Ann Furedi, chief executive of the British Pregnancy Advisory Service, said: "We welcome this ruling.

"Bpas supports the right to refuse to work in abortion care, not least because women deserve better than being treated by those who object to their choice.

"But the law as it stands already provides healthcare workers with these protections.

"Extending this protection to tasks not directly related to the abortion would be the detriment of women needing to end a pregnancy and the healthcare staff committed to providing that care.

"There are enough barriers in the way of women who need an abortion without further obstacles being thrown in their way."

Gillian Smith, RCM Director for Scotland, said: "This ruling is sensible and both women and midwives will welcome it.

"The ruling gives extensive definition to complex clinical and other situations, in regard to whether conscientious objection applies or not.

"Midwives and other clinicians will benefit from this ruling's clarity and women will be able to continue to exercise their choice over their reproductive rights."