British Section of the World Federation of Doctors Who Respect Human Life

The Rt. Hon. Ann Widdecombe MP (Daily Express, 26 Apr 06) chronicled the efforts of Charlotte’s parents, Darren and Debbie, to prevent hospital doctors letting her die. Doctors “told one court that Charlotte would not survive the winter of 2004-5. Wrong. Earlier this year, they were still insisting she was in a critical condition and would die within weeks. Wrong again.” Each time the parents appeared before the court, they had to wait in suspense for the judge’s ruling.

In April Charlotte was well enough to leave hospital, but her parents by then had split up. Ann Widdecombe commented: “If the Health authority had invested half as much energy into supporting the loving parents as it put into securing the child’s death, a seriously sick little child would now be in her own family home instead of facing being farmed out to foster carers.”

Charlotte has been in the same part of the same hospital as David Glass, whose mother Carol was also told that he was “going to die”. His aunts and uncle were imprisoned for rescuing him.

“A judge at the High Court in London last week refused to rule that an 18-month old boy with type 1 spinal muscular atrophy be allowed to die, against the unanimous opinion of medical experts mentioned in the case,” Clare Dyer reported in the BMJ, 25 March 06. “Mr. Justice Holman said he was ‘not persuaded, even taking into account predicted future deterioration, that it is currently in the best interest of M.B. to discontinue ventilation with the inevitable result that he will immediately die.’ However, he said that the boy should not be subjected to further painful procedures.

The Times had reported (11 March 06):

“Anita Macaulay, chief executive of the Jennifer Trust for Spinal Muscular Atrophy, whose daughter died from the condition, said this case had sent a chill through its membership. ‘If this M.B. case goes the wrong way and the parents lose, then the next time they or their child are rushed into hospital with pneumonia, are they going to get switched off too?’” She regretted that the hospital cannot be named.

After the ruling “His 22-year old mum said “He means the world to us. No matter what situation he’s in, he’s still our son. (Daily Mirror, 16 March 06).

BBC News reported that Ruth Everard, who also has spinal muscular atrophy, was ‘delighted’. She is an Oxford graduate and recently qualified as a solicitor.

Her parents had found that wheelchairs suitable for children with this condition were not available, so her father, a design engineer, made them himself. “Now the company supplies chairs all over the world.” Not many are needed in Britain, perhaps, if hospitals have their way.

Dominic Lawson (Independent, 17 March 06) quoted the voice-over of a film showing footage of severely handicapped children:

”They have to vegetate in an existence which no longer has anything in common with the purpose of human life. They must, because a religion which is alienated from reality has given rise to medical ethics still current today, which make it the task and duty of the doctor to preserve the life of every person under all circumstances.” The speaker recommended the “humane and painless“ operation of a gas chamber.

Mrs Sue Axon, a mother of two teenage daughters, lost her case in the High Court on 23rd January. She had claimed the right to be informed if her underage daughters had been referred for abortion; the judge ruled that parental rights under human rights legislation were overridden by the child’s right to “confidential advice from doctors.”

In Texas, the abortion rates for girls aged 15 to 18 fell after a parental notification law took effect in 2000, the New England Journal of Medicine reported on 9 March 06.

Abortion rates fell by 16% among 17-year olds, 20% among 16-year olds and 11% among 15%-year olds.

A study in New Zealand that tracked approximately 500 women from birth to 25 years of age has confirmed that young women who have abortions subsequently experience elevated rates of suicidal behaviour, depression, substance abuse, anxiety, and other mental problems, the Elliot Institute reported on 9 Feb 06 (David M. Fergusson, L.John Horwood and Elizabeth M. Ridder, “Abortion in young women and subsequent mental health”, Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 47(1): 16-24, 2006).

“Most significantly, the researchers – led by Professor David Fergusson who is the director of the Longitudinal Christchurch Health and Development Study – found that the higher rate of subsequent mental problems could not be explained by any pre-pregnancy differences in mental health, which had been regularly evaluated over the course of the 25-year study.”

A study by the University of Oslo, published in the journal BMC Medicine, compared the mental distress of 40 women who had suffered a miscarriage with 80 women who had had abortions, the Daily Telegraph reported on 12 Dec. 05. “Although women who had a miscarriage suffered more mental distress up to six months after losing their baby, women who had an abortion experience more mental distress at the two and five-year intervals.”

An opinion poll commissioned by CHOOSE LIFE and carried out by Communicate Research in April 2006 showed that 85% of women want to see more help given to women who want to keep their baby, rather than further moves to make abortion easier. 87% think funds should go to the charities offering alternatives. 78% would like to see a compulsory cooling-off period between diagnosis of pregnancy and a termination. 96% of women want a right to be fully informed of health risks involved in abortion, and 84% believe parents of girls under 16 should have the right to know if their daughter has been referred for a termination.

“A new report from a committee of the National Academies of Science finds that a first-trimester abortion, the most common abortion procedure, is linked to an increasing risk of premature birth;. The report comes from the Institute of Medicine (IOM), a NAS organisation… The IOM reported that premature births before 37 weeks’ gestation represent 12.5 per cent of all US births, a 30% increase since 1981.” (LifeNews.com)

From Robert P. Balfour FRCOG:

The Obituary of Sir John Peel might give readers the impression that he was a man avidly in favour of abortion, having steered the RCOG (Royal College of Obstetricians & Gynaecologists) Committee which advised the government prior to the Abortion Act of 1967. In fact he was very much against abortion without a justifiable medical reason and supported the amendments, later defeated, which were put forward in the Lords and which would have restricted the present functioning of the Act. On 19,10,67, he wrote a letter to “The Times”, in his position as President of the RCOG, explaining his reasons for supporting the amendments. For subsequent decades he has been a Patron of this organisation which unashamedly has sought to rectify the present abuses of the Act.

Robert P. Balfour FRCOG,
President, Doctors who Respect Human Life.

Lady Peel thanked Dr. Balfour for his letter.

Germaine Greer, disagreeing with the government report Teenage Pregnancy Next Steps, wrote for The Times on 24 July 06: “Already we need every baby we can get; a sound social policy would make sure that we don’t condemn the ones we have to poverty and marginalisation.” The Child Support Agency should have been made to work.