A SCOTTISH court has ruled against two Catholic midwives who claimed that their religious rights had been violated by the Greater Glasgow and Clyde NHS.
According to the BBC, Mary Doogan, 57, and Concepta Wood, 51, claimed they were being forced to supervise staff taking part in abortions. But judge Lady Smith, at the Court of Session, said:
Nothing they have to do as part of their duties terminates a woman’s pregnancy. They are sufficiently removed from direct involvement as, it seems to me, to afford appropriate respect for and accommodation of their beliefs.
Mary Doogan and Concepta Wood
The midwifery sisters were employed as labour ward co-ordinators at the Southern General Hospital in Glasgow, although Ms Doogan has been absent due to ill health since March 2010 and Mrs Wood has transferred to other work due to the dispute.
The health board maintained that the Abortion Act did not confer on the midwives any right to refuse to delegate, support or supervise staff providing nursing care for women going through abortions.
The midwives, whose case was bankrolled by the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children, claimed that the health board decision also breached their rights under Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights which guarantees the right to freedom of religion.
But Lady Smith said she was not satisfied that their Article 9 rights were being interfered with.
She said their right of conscientious objection was not unqualified and they had agreed to take up the roles of labour ward co-ordinators, although they now took objection to the job content.
The judge added:
In any event, the nature of their duties does not in fact require them to provide treatment to terminate pregnancies directly.
A spokeswoman for the health board said:
NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde recognises the absolute right of staff to conscientiously object to participate in treatments authorised within the Abortion Act 1967. We are fully supportive of staff who hold a position of conscientious objection and make every effort to accommodate them, however at the same time we have an unequivocal duty of care to ensure the safety of our patients and as such we must balance this responsibility with the rights of the conscientious objector.
Paul Tully, general secretary of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC), said:
We are very disappointed by the judgment. SPUC has supported the midwives in bringing their case, and will now be considering their further legal options with them.
In a statement issued after the case, Doogan said:
Neither Connie nor I stand in judgement of any woman who chooses to terminate her pregnancy for whatever reasons. We are more than aware of the difficult choices that some expectant mothers may be faced with in a crisis pregnancy.
However, in holding to the view that life should be protected from conception to natural death, neither do we wish to be judged for exercising what is our legal right to refuse to participate in the process of medical termination of pregnancy.
Hat tip: Agent Cormac & Angela Kingdom
And let’s not forget the latest example of persecution:
From the Daily Heil:
http://goo.gl/ukwuT
From the provisional wing of the RC Church:
http://goo.gl/ltRZp
To claim exclusive rights over a non-religious community facility and exhibit a slobbering lust to impose their own particular sectarian symbols on the still grieving families of the dead displays a level of arrogance and entitlement that is difficult to comprehend.
If they didn’t want the job, they shouldn’t have applied.
If it’s so important to you, then get a job that doesn’t involve the thing you’re objecting to. Simple.
An abortion supervisor called Concepta?
Do you really expect us to fall for this one Barry? You’ve been told before – stop making up silly names.
When, do we think, are the religiots going to realise they are just chucking good money after bad with these futile and pointless assertions that their belief in the supernatural transcends the law? Hopefully it will eventually bleed them dry.
Remigius, the moment I clocked that name I just knew that I would be accused of making it up. But I thought BarrieJohn would get the boot in first.
Concepta Woodn’t.
Thing I never get about British pro-lifers – if human life is so sacred why won’t they unequivocally condemn the bombings and shootings carried out by their kissing cousins in the US?
Every time one of these nuts puts something in the local paper I reply, taking their points to bits but also asking them to at least condemn murder and mayhem carried out ‘in God’s name’. Not one has done so yet.
I have good reason for challenging them over this. In the mid -1990′s the FBI asked Special Branch and other UK agencies for help tracing foreign donations to the religious militias carrying out such atrocities. As far as I can tell, they were making some headway too, and to my certain knowledge at least as late as 2003 the FBI were still asking financial institutions in offshore jurisdictions to check any attempts to move money from the UK and Ireland abroad (including ‘donations’ to foreign religious charities) by groups and individuals known to be involved in the pro-life movement. Sadly, been sidelined since then by an emphasis on checking out financial transactions which might be linked to another religion’s nutjobs, but I suspect that if it were a higher priority we’d be seeing some arrests.
I am sure these women, who voluntarily took jobs which they may leave at any time, performing duties removed from those they object to, will take advantage of the time now free due to the case being closed and led their support to Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani. Who happens to be a Christian facing actual persecution rather than the self-generated mild discomfort these two women complained about.
No? No. No, far easier to complain about something that never happened than try to save a life. And far more noble to save imaginary children than an actual grown man.
Surprise, surprise, another case of christians claiming discrimination that’s failed. As others have pointed out, these people are forever claiming how hard done by they are yet, compared to so many others throughout the world, they’ve got it easy.
It is perfectly reasonable for the NHS to allow anyone who objects to abortion for whatever reason to opt out of taking part in the procedure. But having been given an inch they insist on taking a mile.
If your principles are so overwhelmingly important then find another field of work. It’s a hospital, the priority is, or should be, patient care. If a member of staff feels they can’t do that but must prioritise their own beliefs they should get the hell out.
Somewhat OT, but it’s good to see the deranged killers of Kristy Bamu have today been found guilty of his murder.
It is, of course, easy to label this kind of appalling, violent, superstitious nonsense as ‘witchcraft’, but at the end of the day it’s still religion. It’s still one set of people victimising, persecuting and brutalising others because of some insane belief in the supernatural.
Despicable retards all.
Religidiots………….. Just kill yourselves. You’ll never be missed!
Religidiots………….. Just kill yourselves. You’ll never be missed!
That’s a pretty stupid thing to say.
the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children
I like it. Let’s form the
Society for the Restitution of Unpaid Millionaires
and sue us some major corporations.
I’m surprised nobody has complained about a miscarriage of justice.
remigius
I don’t know how you can conceive of such a thing!
I once got the sack from a job because I refused to make the coffee
…………bloody starbucks
And I got sacked from the sewerage works. They said that I was just going through the motions.
More attention-seeking misfits whining about having to do the jobs they voluntarily contracted to do. We should welcome these court cases because they reflect so badly on all believers. Let’s just hope they keeping losing them.