DEACON FOR LIFE

Were there to be no support in the whole history of ethical and moral thought, were there no acknowledged confirmation from medical science, were the history of legal opinion to the contrary, we would still have to conclude on the basis of God's Holy Word that the unborn child is a person in the sight of God. He is protected by the sanctity of life graciously given to each individual by the Creator, Who alone places His image upon man and grants them any right to life which they have.

Monday, February 28, 2011

Abortion draft guidelines slammed as "grossly inept" by pro-life group SPUC

Abortion draft guidelines slammed as "grossly inept" by pro-life group SPUC
3 Whitacre Mews, Stannary Street London, SE11 4AB, United Kingdom Telephone: (020) 7091 7091 Email: information@spuc.org.uk http://www.spuc.org.uk


London, 28 February 2010: Draft guidelines on abortion by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecology (RCOG) have been slammed as "grossly inept" by the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC), a leading pro-life group. Paul Tully, SPUC general secretary, said: "The RCOG draft guidelines play down the physical and psychological side-effects of abortion, discounting the real and serious damage that abortion can cause. Ireland, where abortion is banned, scores the world's best record in maternal health year after year. Chile, where abortion is also banned, has the lowest maternal mortality rate in Latin America. "The guidelines are very badly drafted, as they have totally confused Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland and totally misunderstood the legal positions in both jurisdictions. This is grossly inept, as such misinformation could be extremely dangerous if followed. Other black marks in the draft guidelines include: the false claim that the right of conscientious objection to abortion only applies to doctors (line 1044) or only to doctors and nurses (line 1084) - when it applies to any person called upon to participate in an abortion the contemplation of enforced abortions on some 16-17 year-olds (1260 - 1262) failing to require that women be informed of alternatives to abortion and how to obtain such help (1438) the failure to suggest that doctors should be wary of situations where women seek abortions on unlawful grounds (e.g. for social sex selection), or where women seek abortion under duress (1494) Mr Tully concluded: "The RCOG has long since been an extension of the pro-abortion lobby. Its draft guidelines reflect that institutional bias and should therefore be binned." To receive this news regularly, visit http://www.spuc.org.uk/em-signup. The reliability of the news herein is dependent on that of the cited sources, which are paraphrased rather than quoted. Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the society. © Society for the Protection of Unborn Children, 2011