Tim Worstall

NHS Abortions

On the basis of absolutely no evidence whatsoever I wonder whether this might be something to do with the change in the ethnic/religious background that’s taken place amongst doctors in recent decades (no, clearly, the doctors haven’t changed ther background, rather that which doctors are drawn from has changed).

Doctors have always been able to opt out of doing
abortions on religious grounds. Since the 1990s they have also been
able to label themselves "conscientious objectors", and the Royal
College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) claims an increasing
number do not want to carry out terminations for ethical reasons.

Richard
Warren, the honorary secretary of the RCOG, said: "In the past,
abortion was an accepted part of the workload. People did not like it
but they accepted it was in the best interests of the woman concerned.
Now we are seeing more doctors who are reluctant to be involved in the
process."

It isn’t just Catholics who are, for religious reasons, opposed to abortions. As far as I’m aware, Islam has very much the same near total ban on the procedure. I’ve no numbers on this, but my impression at least is that there are more Muslim doctors now than there were a couple of decades ago.

Are the two points related?

In

7 responses

  1. Rupert Fiennes Avatar
    Rupert Fiennes

    I think it’s considerably more basic than that Tim. Medicine, for better or worse, is becoming a female dominated profession. Despite what a lot of “feminists” will tell you, women, particularly after becoming mothers, feel very uncomfortable with abortion

    Reply
  2. dearieme Avatar
    dearieme

    So there are people who’d reckon it a sin to abort the child, but OK to murder a dishonourably pregnant woman, in the name of religion?

    Reply
  3. Mike Davies Avatar
    Mike Davies

    I imagine such people would wait for the woman to give birth before executing her.
    As we used in the UK.

    Reply
  4. dearieme Avatar
    dearieme

    “I imagine…”: and I suspect wishful thinking.

    Reply
  5. magnusw Avatar
    magnusw

    Tim, it seems to me that religion is a bit of a side issue, many of the objections will be simply because it’s a shitty job to do and they’ll come up with any old conscientious excuse not to do it. However if the private sector can find so many people to perform the job then it seems that a lot of objection can be overcome just by paying them more to do it. I’m rather new to this free market stuff, but isn’t that simple supply and demand economics?

    Reply
  6. Mike Davies Avatar
    Mike Davies

    “it’s a shitty job to do and they’ll come up with any old conscientious excuse not to do it”
    But why are there more using this excuse now than in the past ?
    And what do you mean ‘shitty’?
    Routine?
    Depressing?

    Reply
  7. magnusw Avatar
    magnusw

    Mike, the conscientious objector reason has been available since the early nineties and the reduction in junior doctor working hours a few years back combined mean that more people can refuse and yet more don’t seem to get the training. So as older doctors retire the younger don’t have the skills or desire.
    By shitty I mean both routine, depressing and disgusting. I am sure there are many genuinely needy cases but I’m also sure there are many idiots too drunk or thoughtless to use a rubber. Imagine you’re training to be a doctor, saving lives must be much more appealing than performing an endless stream of routine operations ripping baby parts out of careless people. Like I say though, the fact the private sector have the means to perform the job shows that with the right incentives you can get doctors to do it.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Discover more from Tim Worstall

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading