§ 11. Mrs. Knightasked the Secretary of State for Social Services if she will publish the text of the letter sent recently by the Chief Medical Officer to the Department of Health to regional medical officers concerning the appointment of doctors who will not undertake abortion operations.
§ Mrs. KnightIs the Minister aware that though the wording of the letter is extremely ambiguous, its meaning is perfectly clear—that doctors who object to carrying out abortion operations will not be appointed to hospital positions? How does this square with the conscience clause in the 1967 Act? Is it not the fact that 320 even when the country faces possible extinction in a war, conscientious objectors are, quite rightly, not forced to fight? How, then, can it be right that young obstetricians have to choose between a job and their conscience?
§ Dr. OwenI am advised that there is no conflict. Section 4 of the Abortion Act ensures that an individual who has conscientious objections to abortion may not be compelled to take part in abortion operations, except in cases of medical emergency. It is not any breach of this for the Chief Medical Officer to give advice relating to selection procedures with a view to ensuring, where appropriate, the provision of a service with relation to termination of pregnancy.
§ Mrs. HaymanIs my hon. Friend aware that many of us are concerned not only to safeguard the rights of doctors who have conscientious objections to performing abortions but also to safeguard the rights of women entitled to an abortion under the 1967 Act to equal facilities, wherever they live in the country? Is he aware that we greatly welcome any steps taken by the Department to improve this service nationally?
§ Dr. OwenI agree with my hon. Friend. We have a responsibility for the nation and particularly in those areas in which it is extremely difficult to achieve abortion. We also have a responsibility to doctors to respect their conscience clause. I think that the two can be married together, and it was an attempt sensibly to do this that resulted in discussions with the medical profession, when the Chief Medical Officer sent out the letter that he did in February.
§ Mr. Biggs-DavisonIs it not a fact that members of the medical profession have been prejudiced and are being prejudiced in their careers because of these conscientious objections, which I fully accept the Government wish to retain?
§ Dr. OwenIt is a very difficult question of balance. What we are dealing with here is the question of the selection procedures. It is invidious for a consultant to be questioned on his particular religious views. There is also an obligation on the health service, in some areas in which consultants are not ready to undertake termination and who are 321 already using the conscience clause objection—which I can perfectly well understand—to try to ensure that the point mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Welwyn and Hatfield (Mrs. Hayman) is met: that there are some facilities available for women who wish to take advantage of the Act.
§ Mrs. Renée ShortDoes my hon. Friend accept that this is a matter of very great concern, which was reported on by the Lane Committee, and that where doctors claim the protection of the conscience clause in the Act they should also be required to refer their patients, upon whom they are not willing to operate, to doctors who do not have the same conscience objections as they have?
§ Dr. OwenThat would be normal good practice. If any doctor, because of conscience objections, felt unable to use the Act, he or she would wish to refer the patient to another doctor. The problem that exists in some areas is that there are no doctors who are willing to undertake operations under the Abortion Act. That is the biggest problem we face.