Abortion rules shakeup could set system back 25 years, says GPs’ chief

Controversy surrounds government plans over independent counselling of women considering terminations The head of the Royal College of General Practitioners has warned that government moves to shake up pre-abortion counselling for women could create new barriers and set the system back 25 years. Clare Gerada defended abortion charities, disputing accusations that they are biased in their counselling and encourage women to have abortions because they are subsequently paid to carry out the terminations. The government has announced a change in the rules to ensure that women are also offered counselling provided independently of the charity-run services, such as the British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS) and Marie Stopes. MPs who are backed by anti-abortion groups claim the move justifies the argument that there is a conflict of interest in the way services are run. Nadine Dorries, the Conservative MP who is leading the campaign, has confirmed she still intends to make an attempt to amend the health and social care bill when it returns to the Commons next week. She wants to guarantee that counselling is independent of the charities, even though the government insists it can change the rules without legislating. Gerada, who has previously worked in abortion clinics, told the Guardian: “There is no agenda in abortion services, there is no pressure at all to encourage women to have an abortion. They encourage women to make a decision about what they want to do. “The idea that BPAS or Marie Stopes are colluding to make a profit is wrong. “If these independent counsellors include GPs, which I suspect they will, we know what happened before when you had a service that relied on GPs signing the forms. You had delays as some are conscientious objectors. Why fix what’s not broken? It’s worked well for 25 years. “I work [as a GP] in Lambeth. I’ve never heard of abuse in this system. Anything that puts a barrier between a woman to make a choice in timely manner must be a bad thing and will simply reverse the advances of the past 25 years.” If the Speaker chooses to select the controversial amendment, MPs of every party will be given a free vote, as is the tradition with votes on abortion. Other recent attempts to change the abortion laws have been defeated. This time, though, owing to the more nuanced nature of the proposal and a widespread belief that the new intake of Tory MPs are more socially conservative, the outcome is expected to be very close. Frank Field, the Labour MP who tabled the amendments with Dorries, said he had received assurances from health minister Anne Milton that the government would propose in amendments to the bill that local authorities be advised to consider the independence of advice offered in counselling services, allowing a debate in the chamber. Field has asked Milton for assurances that if there is then a move to introduce a mandatory order to offer independent advice, there should be a debate and vote in the Commons. “It is a general principle that advice and services should be separate,” Field said. “I have no evidence of that [biased advice]. But we had no evidence of mis-selling of pensions until people investigated.” He said he was not an anti-abortionist and that he had refused meetings with known anti-abortion groups to discuss the plans. Abortion Health Women Health policy Public services policy Frank Field Polly Curtis Ben Quinn guardian.co.uk

Posted by on August 29, 2011. Filed under News, Politics, World News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.