Royal College of Midwives chief refuses calls to resign

Published: May 18th, 2016

|
- Abortion

The Chief Executive of the Royal College of Midwives (RCM) has refused to step down from her post following calls for her resignation, after it has emerged that the organisation is backing a campaign to completely decriminalise abortion.

As well as the Chief Executive of the RCM, Cathy Warwick is also the Chair of the British Pregnancy Advisory Service's Board of Trustees, which is spearheading a campaign called ‘We Trust Women’.

The campaign calls for the current 24-week limit to be scrapped and abortions to be permissible up to birth.

Ms Warwick has come under criticism from several organisations, including midwives, Christian Concern and other pro-life groups, and several MPs who have stated that as a BPAS board member, Warwick has a clear conflict of interest. A number of individuals, including Christian Concern’s Chief Executive Andrea Williams, have suggested that Ms Warwick step down.

One of RCM’s 'strategic objectives'

The RCM’s members were not consulted on the new policy and it has not been made clear on the organisation’s website. The board, made up of 9 senior members, was also not given a vote on the policy.

Yet Professor Warwick has insisted it "wasn’t a necessity" for her to ask the board or its members before joining the campaign.

"It’s absolutely right the board didn’t have a vote on it," she argued. "But we wouldn’t expect them to. It’s not a necessity. It’s not something we vote on because it’s in line with one of our strategic objectives, which the board determine, which is about supporting women’s choice in their reproductive health. You can never know if a policy reflects the views of every single member. If members object, we consider that and I report that to the board."

Calls for RCM chair’s resignation

The revelation that the RCM has quietly backed BPAS’ campaign has been met with dismay from midwives across the country, as the RCM’s new stance on abortion will have serious ramifications for midwives who hold conscientious objection.

A counter-campaign, 'Not in our Name' has been launched for midwives and members of the public to express their opposition. The petition has reached over 17,000 signatures so far, including more than 200 midwives.

Some are now calling on Cathy Warwick to step down.

Labour MP Robert Flello commented: "If I was a [RCM] board member I would be urgently demanding to know why I was not consulted on an issue of such importance and I would be seriously considering whether the chief executive needed to be sacked."

Cathy Warwick responded by saying she feels the two roles are"compatible".

"I don’t see why I should resign," she said.

Paul Tully of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children said the RCM’s new policy shows that the organisation holds an "ideological prejudice".

"If the RCM didn’t even ask its board to vote … it is an appalling indictment of the organisation and shows an ideological prejudice in favour of abortion. Midwifery is a caring profession … Abortion is a total contradiction of that," he said.

'You just can’t play God with these things'

Midwives have spoken out against the policy, expressing concern that they were not consulted.

Midwife Sharon Hayes, who has been in the profession for 33 years, said: "When you have delivered pre-term babies who live, you realise you just can’t play God with these things. What the RCM is doing is a step too far. Cathy Warwick has endorsed something the vast majority of her members would not support. She should have asked us first."

67-year-old Elizabeth Willey, a midwife of 44 years, said: "The policy is completely outrageous. There are babies walking around today who were born at 22 weeks. Full-term abortion is utterly barbaric. It involves a lethal injection to the child as it is being born... essentially infanticide. Our society doesn’t want that."

'Sanctity of life'

Writing for the Daily Mail, Isabel Oakeshott, who has three children but has suffered several miscarriages, voiced her objection to the campaign.

"[Cathy Warwick] seeks to sanitise a proposal with grotesque practical implications for the medical profession, and terrible potential physical and emotional consequences for mothers-to-be, in the politically correct language of ‘respecting women’s rights’ over their bodies," she remarked.

She explained how her perception of the value of the unborn child has changed over time, shaped by her personal experience. "The life-changing experience a decade later of watching a ‘bunch of cells’ slowly but surely evolve into a little boy — my son — and the dark despair I felt in the years that followed when four of my subsequent pregnancies failed, gave me a remarkable new appreciation for what many people of religious faith call the ‘sanctity of life’."

Rather than extend the abortion limit to full term, Ms Oakeshott believes that life ought to be protected at all stages.

"The dreadful experience of desperately willing a series of tiny unborn babies to cling onto life inside me meant I could never again take that ‘bunch of cells’ for granted," she said.

Abortion law

Changes to abortion law are the result of backbenchers’ Private Members bills, and are invariably conscience votes. There are no MPs who have won the backbencher’s ballot to increase or reduce the limit at which abortions are permitted.