§ 3.0 p.m.
§ BARONESS SUMMERSKILLMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government, since the administration of the birth control pill involves:—
- (i) danger to health and possibly to life;
- (ii) an increased risk of venereal disease; and
- (iii) the possibility of an unwanted pregnancy—
§ LORD ABERDARENo, my Lords; this is for the doctor to decide. I am advised that people of 16 or over can consent to their own medical treatment, but I should expect that doctors would obtain the prior consent of parents or guardians in the case of those under 16. Advice was given to local authorities when the Family Planning Act came into force that in so far as they provided services for those under 16 they would be well advised to seek parental consent. This advice was copied to Executive Councils and local medical committees. The Committee on Safety of Drugs, which keeps continually under review the safety of the oral contraceptives, assesses the risk to health and life as very small indeed.
§ BARONESS SUMMERSKILLMy Lords, in view of the fact that the noble Lord has told the House that the clinics should advise mothers in certain cases, would he not be a little more forthcoming? Does he realise that this House decided the age of majority to be 18, and that under 18 girls should be cared for by their parents and guardians? Is he aware that these girls go back to their homes with these contraceptives; that, as we know, they may develop side-effects, such as thrombosis, 1342 liver trouble and depression, and that they may become pregnant or may develop V.D.? Yet their parents are living with them and have no idea that the girl has been taking the contraceptive pill. Therefore, is not the word "parent" or "guardian" of the under-17s rather a misnomer, because the girl is left to care for herself? I think that the House should take a stronger line on the subject.
§ LORD ABERDAREMy Lords, these are very difficult and delicate personal matters which are not easy to discuss in question and answer. The fact is that in the opinion of the Government it is much better to leave it to the local family doctor who knows the family and who knows the girl concerned, rather than to lay down rigid rules. Apart from those who take the view of the noble Baroness, there are a great many others who are striving all they can, through the family planning clinics, to prevent the great increase in the number of unwanted pregnancies. I think they would have a different view from that expressed by the noble Baroness.
§ BARONESS SUMMERSKILLMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware that there is now a case (it is sub judice, but he has mentioned it) where a doctor did tell the mother, and that doctor is now being charged with acting in an unethical manner?
§ LORD ABERDAREMy Lords, as the noble Baroness says, that matter is sub judice and I should not wish to comment upon it. I did not mention the case.
§ BARONESS SUMMERSKILLThe noble Lord did.
§ BARONESS GAITSKELLMy Lords, as my noble friend's statements on the contraceptive pill become wilder and wilder, would not the Minister agree that a few relevant facts and figures would help the public to weigh up the problems involved and would allay some of the anxieties that are caused? The Minister has already dealt with my noble friend's challenge to the Family Law Reform Act 1969, under which a girl of 16 is an adult and is entitled to the right of medical secrecy—
THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (EARL JELLICOE)My Lords, I am loath to 1343 interrupt the noble Baroness, but I think she should put a question.
§ BARONESS GAITSKELLYes. Would not the Minister agree that the need for girls under 18 to receive medical advice about contraception is demonstrated by the number of pregnancies? Some 15,000 girls under 18 became pregnant in 1969. Is the Minister also aware that family planning clinics and Brook Advisory Centres always inform general practitioners whose patients wish to take oral contraceptives? Is he also aware—
SEVERAL NOBLE LORDS: Order!
§ BARONESS GAITSKELLMy Lords, there is one more question. I am sorry, but this is most important. Is the Minister also aware that the 13 Brook Advisory Centres throughout Britain see 10,000 new patients a year, and that about 1,000 of these are under 18? Of this total number—
SEVERAL NOBLE LORDS: Order!
EARL JELLICOEMy Lords, again I hesitate to intervene because of my great respect for the noble Baroness, but I think that some of her questions would more properly be put in the form of an Unstarrcd Question. I think she is taking a little time over her supplementary questions. But I appreciate the interest of the House in this important and delicate matter.
§ LORD ABERDAREMy Lords, in reply to the noble Baroness, Lady Gaitskell, may I say that I of course recognise much of what the noble Baroness says to be correct. For the particular reason that there are two schools of thought about it, we consider that the best way through the problem as it is at the moment is that the local family doctor should advise. The only advice that the Government give is that where a girl is under sixteen the parents' consent should first be obtained.
§ LORD BLYTONMy Lords, is the Minister aware that there is great anxiety among those who have daughters under the age of eighteen? Is it not outrageous that this thing should happen and that doctors should keep silent and do nothing about it? I think it is out- 1344 rageous. A parent is the guardian of his child until she is eighteen, and I think these things ought not to happen—
§ LORD BLYTONMy Lords, is the Minister further aware that the permissiveness in society is a result of laws which have been passed here? Can we not spend money now to bring people to the natural state of society?
§ LORD ABERDAREMy Lords, I am as well aware as the noble Lord of the importance of the family; but I would suggest to him that in many cases where a happy family is involved the situation need not arise, and that in all probability the daughter would have such a relationship with the rest of the family, particularly with her mother, that there would be no question of the family not knowing what she was up to.
§ BARONESS LLEWELYN-DAVIES OF HASTOEMy Lords, is the Minister not aware that many of us on this side warmly welcome the way in which he has answered this Question?
§ LORD ABERDAREMy Lords, I am extremely grateful to the noble Baroness.
§ LORD BURNTWOODMy Lords, may I ask the Minister whether the original reply took full account of the particular problem of female mental in-patients and mental out-patients?
§ LORD ABERDARENo, my Lords. I would ask the noble Lord if he would kindly put down another Question on that matter.
§ LORD SEGALMy Lords, can the noble Lord explain how the administration of a birth control pill involves the possibility of an unwanted pregnancy? I should have thought it was intended to prevent it.
§ LORD ABERDAREMy Lords, I think that the noble Lord should properly address that question to his noble friend Lady Summerskill.
§ LORD PLATTMy Lords, are Her Majesty's Government aware that a male is necessary to cause a pregnancy, wanted or unwanted; and in so far as we are this 1345 afternoon apparently discussing human behaviour the male should be just as much concerned as the female?
§ LORD ABERDAREYes, my Lords; I take the noble Lord's point.