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

Disability Now reported in December 2006 that “Disability activists said they were ‘shocked and deeply disturbed’ after doctors suggested some disabled babies might be better off if killed at birth. The comments were made as part of a consultation by the Nuffield Council on Bioethics* on prolonging life in fetuses and newborn babies.

“In its submission** the Royal College of Obstetricians called on the Nuffield working party to ‘think more radically’ about a number of issues, “including ‘active euthanasia’ as a ‘means of widening the management options available to the sickest of newborns’.

“The submission cited euthanasia of babies with severe spina bifida as an example that could be discussed. It also called for a discussion on the costs of bringing up a severely disabled child.

“The Disability Rights Commission said it would ‘vehemently oppose’ a move towards euthanasia.

“The Nuffield report concluded that active ending of life of newborn babies should not be allowed, no matter how serious their condition.”

Bill Albert, a member of the United Kingdom Disabled People’s Council, said “The Royal College seems to be stuck in some other century. The barbarity of their suggestions. . . it is worrying stuff.”

*Critical Care Decisions in Fetal and Neonatal Medicine Ethical Issues: for a copy, tel. 020 7682 9619 or visit www.nuffieldbioethics.org

** www.rcog.org.uk