Medics reject proposed abortion policy

Published: Saturday | January 31, 2009


Edmond Campbell, Senior Staff Reporter

AT LEAST 157 medical practitioners and two midwives have signed a petition rejecting the recommendations of the Abortion Policy Review Advisory Group.

The group comprises obstetricians, gynaecologists, paediatricians, general practitioners and psychiatrists from Kingston, Mandeville, Westmoreland and St Ann.

Dr Sheree Simpson presented the petition to the five members, who attended Thursday's meeting of the joint select committee, deliberating on the recommendations of the advisory group.

Key recommendation

A key recommendation from the advisory body is the decriminalisation of abortion.

"We subscribe to the World Medical Association declaration of Geneva (1948), which states, inter alia, 'I will maintain the utmost respect for human life from the moment of conception, even under threat'," declared Simpson.

In their petition, the doctors opposed to abortion argued strongly that the proposed bill to legalise abortion attempts to make lawful the killing of human beings under a wide range of vague or unspecified conditions.

Dr Simpson said the proposed legislation represents "a threat to medical personnel who refuse to participate in this act in any way".

Heighten demands

Consultant obstetrician and gynaecologist, Evan Nepaul, in his presentation, said the legalisation of abortion would only heighten the demands on the already strapped hospital and primary health-care system.

"Be careful we are not opening a can of worms that we will never be able to contain," he said.

Continuing, Nepaul argued that the legalisation of abortion would lead to an increased incidence of infertility and pre-term births and greater risk of getting breast cancer.

He said if health personnel were sanctioned for refusing to do abortions, it would lead to a large exodus of persons from the health service.

Stephanie Christian, a pro-life activist, questioned whether abortion would be among the services being provided free under the Government's new health-care policy.

"If my assumption is correct, I take issue with a government that would use the fruits of my labour, from which I pay taxes, to fund a service to which I am so strongly opposed," she complained.