§ (1) Where the Central Midwives Board decide upon the removal from the roll of the name of any midwife, they may in addition, prohibit her from attending women in child-birth in any other capacity, but such decision of the Board shall be subject to the like appeal as their decision to remove her name from the roll, and, if any woman so prohibited acts in contravention of the prohibition, she shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding ten pounds, unless she proves that she acted in a case of emergency.
§ (2) Any woman whose name is ordered to be removed from the roll for disobeying rules or regulations, or for other misconduct, shall, within fourteen days from the making of the order, surrender her certificate to the Central Midwives Board, and, if she fails to do so, shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding five pounds.
§ Motion made and Question proposed, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."
§ Mr. BOOTHI wish to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether this Clause is strong enough. I am referring particularly to the words in Sub-section (1), "unless she proves that she acted in a case of emergency." The Clause deals with the penalties to be imposed where a woman who has been removed from the roll of midwives subsequently, without authority, attends a woman in a case of child-birth. The Clause says that unless she proves that she acted in a case of emergency she shall be subject to this penalty. But, as a matter of fact, every birth is a case of emergency, and I am pretty certain that any member of the legal profession called upon to defend a woman against such a charge would be easily able to prove that she acted in an emergency. He could emphasise the pain and distress of the mother. What I take it is meant is that if she acts when a qualified midwife is not available. But the Clause does not say that. I am not a draftsman and therefore cannot, on the spur of the moment, suggest any better form of words, but if there is a Report stage of this Bill it seems to me that this is a matter which might well be considered. I am afraid the present words are too vague.
Mr. FISHERHere again we follow the words of the Scottish Act, and personally I think they are strong enough. What is intended is that if a woman says, "Although I have been prohibited from doing this kind of work, yet, in this case there was no certified midwife who could possibly assist this poor woman in her trouble and I accordngly did it as an act of mercy"—in such a case it is intended that the fine should not be imposed.
§ Question put, and agreed to.
§ Clause 9 (Notification of Change of of Address) ordered to stand part of the Bill.