Doctors reject plan to force them to reveal beliefs on abortion

DOCTORS should not have to reveal, in leaflets and posters, whether they oppose abortion, medics said yesterday.

Delegates at the British Medical Association (BMA) conference in Edinburgh heard calls that doctors should have to tell patients if they had conscientious objections to abortion or in vitro fertilisation (IVF).

But the appeal was narrowly rejected by doctors, several of whom feared advertising that they were willing to handle abortion cases would put them at risk from extremists opposed to the procedure.

The BMA said a big concern of doctors was that they may not think leaflets were the best way of giving this information.

In a heated debate at the BMA's annual meeting, Dr Evan Harris, a BMA member and Lib Dem MP, said that while doctors' objections to abortion and IVF should be respected, as set out in law, medics could not just pick and choose what services they provide for their patients.

"I think we should say we do not want a pick-and-mix health service," he said.

"The right to conscientiously object to abortion and IVF should be maintained but we should go no further."

He called for medical practices to make "every effort to inform patients in advance, for example through practice leaflets" which doctors were able to advise on abortion.

But doctors rejected the motion, with 50.6 per cent of delegates voting against – despite guidance from the General Medical Council suggesting such information should be available.

Dr Paul Mills, of the BMA's Lothian division, said he had fears about the suggestion that practices should produce leaflets setting out their objections, due to concerns about "pro-life" extremists.

"My potential worry is that this could target doctors, particularly around the issue of abortion, and I don't think that is what we should be doing. To steal a phrase from colleagues in America, abortionists could come to be known," he said.

Doctors providing abortion services in America have been placed on hit lists by "pro-life" campaign groups, with several attacks on medics.

Dr Harris, responding to the concerns raised during the debate about patient information, said: "It is about the duty of candour. You cannot disguise from patients something they are entitled to know."

Dr Vividness Nathan, head of science and ethics at the BMA, said doctors at the conference had concerns about giving information on abortion in leaflets when there were other ways of going about it.

"You can do it individually to patients, you can do it in posters on the practice wall, you can do it in the leaflet and there are other ways as well," she said.

"There is a feeling that it should be up to individuals how they inform patients."

Julie Bentley, chief executive of the Family Planning Association, said it was disappointed doctors did not want the information available to patients before consultations.

"About 20 per cent of doctors say they are against abortion and some let this influence the advice they offer," she said.

Medics tested for MRSA in new attempt to stall infection's spread

DOCTORS have been tested for MRSA in attempts to assess the role of staff in spreading the infection in hospitals.

About 200 medics at the British Medical Association conference in Edinburgh this week took part in the study, with swabs taken from their noses and mobile phones.

Researchers said they were trying to work out the extent to which doctors carrying the MRSA bug.

Patients going into hospital in Scotland are currently taking part in pilot MRSA screening programmes.

But there have also been calls for staff to be screened for MRSA in a bid to tackle infections. However, there are concerns about what hospitals would do if staff could not work because they were persistent carriers of the bug.

Researcher Richard Brady, a surgical research fellow at Edinburgh University, said:

"Many people carry MRSA without displaying any ill effects or symptoms. However those who carry the bacteria could have a role in helping to spread the bacteria to people who are ill and who can become susceptible to the serious effects of MRSA infections."

Professor Hugh Pennington, a leading microbiologist welcomed the study, adding: "It would be very useful to have this information because very little is currently known about NHS staff and levels of MRSA."