Abortion: Marie Stopes Director Asks Whether It's Time To Change The Law On Terminations

Posted: Updated: 23/05/2012 15:27

Tracey McNeill is very calm for someone whose industry has recently been hit by a wave of fresh scrutiny.

The director of abortion provider Marie Stopes in UK and Europe is speaking to The Huffington Post UK as BBC Radio 5 broadcast a special two-hour live show from one of their clinics, speaking to women who have had terminations, healthcare workers, and nurses.

The aim? As her press officer puts it, “demystify” the process. For McNeill it’s about understand what it’s like going into an abortion clinic.

“It is a supportive, friendly, space. It’s real and normal people that end up coming to our clinics,” McNeill says.

There are no protesters outside the abortion providers’ headquarters in London, but asked about reaction to the broadcast, we’re told to look at Twitter.

A cursory glance at the social networking site shows plenty of supportive tweets, but many others asking why the BBC are broadcasting from a “slaughterhouse”, and questioning why they are broadcasting a “two hour long abortion advert.”

“What I get frustrated about is when I listen to, I was listening to the first hour of the radio this morning and when I listen to Karen, our incredible health care assistant, and I know that every single woman she treats really compassionately and with a huge amount of empathy and care. What I get frustrated and upset about is for our own staff when the media say ‘we’re just abortion factories.’ When you come into our centres you know it’s very different,” McNeill says.

It gives an indicator as to why, nearly half a century after abortion was legalised in Britain, it is something that needs to be demystified on live radio.

In McNeill’s view, abortion has crept in the media again in a “highly politicised” manner in the last 18 months.

“I think that it's been the subject of a huge amount of scrutiny. We're not opposed to scrutiny but I think there's been a lot of scrutiny both from the media, from politicians.”

She’s referring to both a push from Nadine Dorries MP to force abortion providers to provide out-of-house counselling services for women considering a termination, something which politicians are currently consulting on, and a recent CQC investigation into abortion clinics.

“One thing I’d like to come out of this is both politicians but generally the general public understand the sensitivity of the issue,” she says.

So, some politicians don’t understand? “I don’t think they do. I think, we’ve opened our doors and we’ve had some very high profile politicians who have come and they’ve gone away thinking ‘wow. this is amazing’.”

She means Dorries, who has fallen foul of pro-choice activists after targeting abortion counselling and calling to ban abortions after 20 weeks. The Tory MP herself says she is pro-choice and after visiting Marie Stopes tweeted that the group “set [the] standard for others to follow.”

Did they change her mind? “Who knows whether we’ve changed her mind,” McNeill says.

“When we invite politicians through our doors it’s never to change their mind because that’s not our role. Our role is to make them understand what really good quality care and counselling looks like and for them to form their own opinions.”

The point is, she says, the question about abortion counselling should never have been looked into by MPs. In fact, she’s annoyed it even was.

“The House [of Commons, who debated it in September] was very clear that there wasn’t an issue.

“This is something that is actually quite clinical and in any other stream of healthcare if you wanted to change the way you deliver a clinical service, or change a clinical pathway then actually that would be driven by the royal colleges because there’d be changes in technology or they’d be different ways of doing things so they colleges would provide guidelines...

“Our disappointment, as we said at the time, is that this has become a political debate rather than one being driven by clinicians and royal colleges.”

Aside from that, there’s also the Care Quality Commission, whose full report is due out at the end of this month. The government was accused of political manoeuvering over the issue of abortion in March after details of alleged up to one in five clinics may be illegally pre-signing abortion forms, were given to the press before providers or the police.

A letter disclosed under FOI later revealed the so-called “raids” (It did feel a bit like that,” McNeill says) cost an estimated £1m and delayed the investigations of 600 other hospitals and care homes by the regulatory group.

"That again was a lot of scrutiny, there was a political decision that the CQC should go and visit abortion clinics,” McNeil says. “I think it was politically motivated, it was the Department of Health who asked for that to happen, through Andrew Lansley.”

“We would always open our doors, we open our doors constantly to external scrutiny from the Department of Health, from the CQC and from commissioners but it did feel a bit like raids because every abortion provider during one week were having unannounced inspections.

“What you have to be careful about is if you go and visit every provider then you're bound to find some things that aren't right but then how do you handle that, because it's really important that women still have access to choice. and women still have access to abortion.”

Then McNeil, who has so far been collected and diplomatic in all her comments, suggests something unexpected - changing the abortion law.

She says she doesn’t think the 1967 Abortion Act needs to change now, but could “within two years” so to get an abortion women only need the signature of one doctor.

“I think there’s legitimate reasons to say [that]. If you require any other surgical or medical intervention you don’t require two signatures.”

She quickly slips back into to diplomatic mode, saying we should wait for the results of the CQC investigation before pushing for anything. “To try and change the law currently when we need to understanding some of the findings from the CQC, is not a time for law reform.”

But the CQC are looking into whether doctors have broken the law by pre-signing abortion forms when you’re saying that you don’t believe in the law?

“Absolutely, in time, but I think that you don’t try and... If you’ve got organisations that are found to be acting outside of the law it’s not a good time to try and push through law reform.”

FOLLOW UK

Tracey McNeill is very calm for someone whose industry has recently been hit by a wave of fresh scrutiny. The director of abortion provider Marie Stopes in UK and Europe is speaking to The Huffing...
Tracey McNeill is very calm for someone whose industry has recently been hit by a wave of fresh scrutiny. The director of abortion provider Marie Stopes in UK and Europe is speaking to The Huffing...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 120
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
07:45 PM on 07/06/2012
Given the range of contraception freely available and the morning after pill, casual abortion is indefensible.
Nothing to do with religion, just about accepting responsibility.
04:26 PM on 06/16/2012
That photograph with the words etched on a pregnant woman's stomach"mine,not yours" reveals the detachment from reality that this image expresses.A woman's body plays host to a foetus and the woman presumably consents in 99% of the cases to intimacy which will lead to pregnancy.Once she allows that possibility,there are natural consequences with rights and responsibilities on both sides.However,in our society only the articulate partner in the pregnancy relationship has the power to dictate events while "the tongueless person gets his life took",to paraphrase an old Cornish proverb.We pride ourselves on protecting minorities and the weak and defenceless but our society seems to lose that perspective when it comes to unborn babies which we dehumanise as foetuses.When will we ever come to terms with our responsibilities rather than insisting upon our rights to their exclusion?
11:54 PM on 05/27/2012
Two thirds of Consultant time is now dedicated to termination of pregnancy, less than one third relating to births. We have an ageing population with too few young people to look after our elderly and couples having conception difficulties have services rationed. The whole emphasis is back to front!
04:17 PM on 05/24/2012
i didnt know it would happen the first time, i was drunk, i meant to get a morning after pill...............oh well seeing as your sorry well take away your mistake put it in a dish and incinerate it as rubbish for you no worries. its disgusting and wrong, abortions should be used in medical emergencies only. when i was at school a girl in my class had 5 abortions by the time we were 16 the procedure itself is not a form of contraception.
ThinkCreeps
Seriously, it's time.
08:27 PM on 05/24/2012
Move to Kansas if you want to live in a uterine theocracy.

Sex education would fix your schoolfriend's little problem, but the `pro-lifers' tend to rail against that too.
01:18 AM on 05/25/2012
you are talking rubbish its not about religion or anything else, and if the rest of the message i had posted came up that part would have made more sense. we did have sex ed at school and as i live in one of the parts of the uk with the highest rate of teen pregnancy it clearly isnt working. i also said that women do have a choice, instead of using abortion to fix their mistakes they have to choice to use contraception or keep their legs closed. if you are not grown up enough to accept the responsibility of a baby dont be a part of the act that makes it happen, too many stupid, irresponsible people get pregnant and then terminate because it is an inconvenience!!!!! i have managed to use contraception safely without it resulting in a child so why cant everyone else, and if you cant then step up and take responsibility for your actions.
12:00 PM on 05/24/2012
If someone wants an abortion it is noone elses business. If you are anti abortion then don't get one if you are pregnant, but it is not fair to try and force your views onto other people.
11:17 AM on 05/24/2012
I think everyone should be sterilised at birth until they can prove they would make good parents. No need for abortions then or any of the hideous social problems we have now.

I appreciate that some might see it as being a tad draconian but it's for the best.
08:24 PM on 05/24/2012
What is a good parent, and how do you prove a talent for it?
I don't understand why you think proving one's capability as a parent would remove all need for abortions - I don't see it would help in any way.
10:31 AM on 05/24/2012
At medical school, we were taught that abortion is the taking of human life. No religious argument there. It is time to demistify abortion by showing an abortion at 14 weeks or later on television.
10:37 AM on 05/24/2012
There have been a lot of photos' lately of babies being born at twenty four weeks and go on to survive and this is the top end of terminations . More of these should be shown, as well as the ones born at eighteen weeks and survive. From conception it is a human life, not an embryo, but a living, breathing person. Women who say my body, my choice should be made to see these babies and be ashamed of their attitude. Women may have the right to getting pregnant or not, but the termination of that life is a big NO.
ThinkCreeps
Seriously, it's time.
11:16 AM on 05/24/2012
If you can show a picture of a baby born at 18 weeks, you should definitely send it to the Guinness Book of Records, as it's 27 days inside the current record.

Even at 34 weeks, it's not breathing. Not until it's outside of its mother's body.

Extend your argument - why is it acceptable to remove a tumour?
It's alive, and growing. It can't survive outside of its host, but then neither can a foetus at 21 weeks.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PiperSniper
02:19 PM on 05/24/2012
I see ... so a man can stick his d**k anywhere he wants but you want control over my uterus? I don't think so.
photo
Catriona
Wha daur meddle wi me?
11:14 PM on 06/09/2012
Someone else with a bad Catholic 'education'.
11:18 PM on 05/23/2012
The essence of the matter is that had any pro-abortionist been terminated, they would not be here to make their arguments, you cannot get around this basic killing fact
ThinkCreeps
Seriously, it's time.
11:50 PM on 05/23/2012
And if there was a early blood test for the likelihood of a contributor being able only to list brainless talking points, chances are there'd be many fewer anti-choicers around wittering on.
This comment has been removed.
This comment has been removed.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
GingerlyColors
No will to change it, no right to criticize it
07:59 PM on 05/23/2012
The abortion limit should be reduced to 13 weeks as in several European countries. The 13th week is the end of the first trimester of pregnancy and this is the point at which the embryo's limbs become fully developed and becomes a foetus. A woman should be able to have a termination on demand within the first 6 weeks of pregnancy, then there should be a week's 'cooling off' period should a woman consider a termination between 6 and 13 weeks.
No doubt people will reply saying that a woman should have the right to decide what happens with her body, what we must not forget is that there is another body growing inside her and that person has few rights. Some people believe that abortion should be available on demand up to the moment of birth - therfore should we have the right to kill a baby immediately after birth? Where do we draw the line? Furthermore doctors, surgeons and nurses should have the right to opt out of ebing involved in the procedure if it goes against their religious or moral views - there are plenty of people prepared to do it. We were all foetuses at one point.
08:49 PM on 05/23/2012
what is the difference between a 11 week unborn child and one of 14 weeks. Why is it OK to kill one and not the other?
ThinkCreeps
Seriously, it's time.
10:40 PM on 05/23/2012
it's absolutely no odds. 22 weeks is the limit for viability. The sooner the better for the mother, but there's no issue with abortion until the fetus could survive on its own.
ThinkCreeps
Seriously, it's time.
09:48 AM on 05/24/2012
The distinction between a fetus/foetus and an embryo is mere semantics.

Independent viability is the only reasonable hurdle, unless you're a life begins at conception kind of guy, in which case, you need to have a good think about the ethics of excising tumors/tumours.

If the responsibilities of your job are interfered with by your superstitions, then you need to find a different job, not refuse to do it.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Nanaama
12:44 PM on 05/24/2012
Comparing growing tumors to embryos is false. An embryo left to grow will leave its host at birth and lead an independent life, whereas a tumor kills its host by its continued growth, and is incapable of independent life outside its host.
07:01 PM on 05/23/2012
Wonder how profitable the business is ? Wonder if profit margins are holding up during the recession ? Would like to know how much her salary is ? Or os money a dirty word here ?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Janet Logan
Brit, Left-to-Moderate, compassionate, pragmatic
07:32 PM on 05/23/2012
These clinics are NHS or not-for-profit for UK citizens. Some things should not be monetarised and this is definitely one of them.
07:39 PM on 05/23/2012
Oh pleasedont tell methese bodies dont pay very lucrative salaries and pensions for executives etc !
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
ChaCubed
Fabulously Liberal
07:30 AM on 05/24/2012
Seems like you're the one who thinks money is a dirty word.
ThinkCreeps
Seriously, it's time.
08:31 PM on 05/24/2012
It's probably a sore point: I guess they've had to let Mrs Doyle go due to cuts and all these abortion-oversensitive Y-chromosomers all have to get the altarboy stains out on their own now.
07:01 PM on 05/23/2012
The message written on that lady's belly has a point. Pregnancy is a personal thing and only the woman whos is pregnant has the right to decide what happens to her unborn child.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
GingerlyColors
No will to change it, no right to criticize it
07:47 PM on 05/23/2012
The message says 'Mine, not your's'. In other words she feels that it is her's to kill if she wanted.
09:35 PM on 05/23/2012
Mine, not yours does not mean killing. It means she has the right to determine what happens to her body, not you!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
ChaCubed
Fabulously Liberal
07:33 AM on 05/24/2012
Yes, use any rhetoric you want; pregnancy does not strip females of their right to determine what happens to their bodies and their lives.
08:50 PM on 05/23/2012
Does the child have any rights?
ThinkCreeps
Seriously, it's time.
09:00 PM on 05/23/2012
Not until it's a child. Hence the term limit, subject to the mother's health.
11:17 PM on 05/23/2012
Whether the unborn child has rights or not is the business of the female carrying that child........not yours and certainly not mine. If she choses to terminate that pregnancy, that is a decision she will have to carry with her for the rest of her life and it is nobody elses business.
06:31 PM on 05/23/2012
i think in this age of extreme resource scarcity and ecological disasters, we should increase the age of abortion - from the current 20 weeks after conception to about, i dunno, 50 years after birth, maybe ? i think anyone who likes BGT, x-factor, eastenders or indeed any nauseating lowest-common-denominator televisual claptrap is fair game !
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
ChaCubed
Fabulously Liberal
07:35 AM on 05/24/2012
If claptrap is the game: you win.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ben Wilson
What's the story mourning Tories?
06:26 PM on 05/23/2012
I somewhat a agree in bringing it down to about 20 weeks. Children have survived being born that early and personally I think when it can survive that's where the line should be drawn. However there was a big vote on this back in around 2008 and a substancial majority of the house rejected a reduction in the time limit. By all means let us adress this again once a decade or so has passed, but there's plenty to debate in the house and abortion has had it's fair share of time for now.
06:56 PM on 05/23/2012
That isnt very logical; if there are reasons to bring the time limit down, then the debate should be now ! We are actually talking about human beings !
I resume you wouldnt be in favour of delaying debate on gay marriage for another decade ?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ben Wilson
What's the story mourning Tories?
07:10 PM on 05/23/2012
I know but there's a point where you have to say thats enough for now, it was the debated, it lost and the government must deal with every issue in the country, not going back again and again to the same issue untill the side that keeps loosing wins.
ThinkCreeps
Seriously, it's time.
09:05 PM on 05/23/2012
About 22 weeks is the absolute limit at the moment. 20 is decided overshoot.

24 weeks remains a good estimate of when survival - and a lack of significant problems - is reasonably secure with good care.
ThinkCreeps
Seriously, it's time.
11:29 AM on 05/24/2012
... actually.. with the very best care, at a large NICU. 
If you're at a run-of-the-mill hospital, then 26-27 weeks is probably more like it.