Doctors who oppose morning-after pill on conscience grounds face qualifications bar
Guidelines confirm that doctors and nurses who oppose controversial emergency contraception on 'moral or religious' grounds cannot receive key specialist qualifications
The bar on qualification applies to medical staff who object to "any form of contraception" Photo: Alamy
7:00AM BST 29 Apr 2014
Doctors and nurses who object to providing controversial emergency contraception on moral or religious grounds are being barred from specialist professional qualifications under official guidelines.
They class Roman Catholics and others motivated by pro-life beliefs as "ineligible" for important qualifications provided by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) even if they complete the training programme.
It led to accusations that the Faculty of Sexual and Reproductive Healthcare, a branch of the RCOG, is unfairly discriminating against medical staff who act on grounds of conscience.
The bar on qualification applies to medical staff who object to "any form of contraception" including the new generation of morning-after pill which can be taken up to five days after sex.
Some Christian doctors who have no moral objection to traditional contraception nevertheless decline to prescribe the so-called "five day after pill" because it acts after fertilisation.
They believe that emergency contraceptive which takes effect after the moment they argue "life" has begun is similar to abortion.
The exclusion, confirmed in updated guidelines, applies to specialist diplomas in sexual and reproductive health as well as full membership of the faculty.
While the diplomas are viewed as an important qualification for GPs or nurses treating sexually transmitted infections or involved in family planning, full membership is seen as essential for doctors who specialise in the field.
The prohibition is confirmed in the latest version of the guidelines which were amended earlier this year after the qualifications were opened to nurses as well as doctors.
It states that those with moral objections are "welcome" to study the diploma course but adds: "Completing the syllabus means willingness during training to prescribe all forms of hormonal contraception, including emergency, and willingness to counsel and refer, if appropriate, for all intrauterine methods.
"Failure to complete the syllabus renders candidates ineligible for the award of a FSRH Diploma."
It adds: "Doctors who hold moral or religious reservations about any contraceptive methods will be unable to fulfil the syllabus for the membership … or specialty training.
"This will render them ineligible for the award of the examination or completion of training certificates."
By contrast, those who refuse to perform abortions on grounds of conscience enjoy special legal protection.
The RCOG insisted that although the new guidelines were recently updated the exclusion was long-standing.
Dr Peter Saunders, chief executive of the Christian Medical Fellowship said: "It bars pro-life doctors from specialising in sexual and reproductive health and also makes it much more difficult for non specialists to get jobs in family planning or reproductive health."
He added that while the rules would clearly affect Catholics who adhere to the church's teaching on contraception, many others would also be impacted.
"If you look at non-Catholic Christians there would be many who may have no objection to contraception and see it as responsible behaviour but who draw the line at prescribing contraceptives which are meant to be taken after fertilisation," he said.
David Jones, director of the Anscombe Bioethics Centre, the Roman Catholic institute in Oxford, said: "By these guidelines the FSRH is seeking deliberately to exclude people who have a conscientious objection to some or all forms of contraception from eligibility for the diploma and from membership of the faculty.
"This is a form of unjust discrimination against professionals on the basis of their personal beliefs and, indirectly, a form of discrimination against patients who share the same beliefs and who may wish to be treated by professionals with a sympathetic understanding of their position."
The exclusion, confirmed in updated guidelines, applies to specialist diplomas in sexual and reproductive health as well as full membership of the faculty.
While the diplomas are viewed as an important qualification for GPs or nurses treating sexually transmitted infections or involved in family planning, full membership is seen as essential for doctors who specialise in the field.
The prohibition is confirmed in the latest version of the guidelines which were amended earlier this year after the qualifications were opened to nurses as well as doctors.
It states that those with moral objections are "welcome" to study the diploma course but adds: "Completing the syllabus means willingness during training to prescribe all forms of hormonal contraception, including emergency, and willingness to counsel and refer, if appropriate, for all intrauterine methods.
"Failure to complete the syllabus renders candidates ineligible for the award of a FSRH Diploma."
It adds: "Doctors who hold moral or religious reservations about any contraceptive methods will be unable to fulfil the syllabus for the membership … or specialty training.
"This will render them ineligible for the award of the examination or completion of training certificates."
By contrast, those who refuse to perform abortions on grounds of conscience enjoy special legal protection.
The RCOG insisted that although the new guidelines were recently updated the exclusion was long-standing.
Dr Peter Saunders, chief executive of the Christian Medical Fellowship said: "It bars pro-life doctors from specialising in sexual and reproductive health and also makes it much more difficult for non specialists to get jobs in family planning or reproductive health."
He added that while the rules would clearly affect Catholics who adhere to the church's teaching on contraception, many others would also be impacted.
"If you look at non-Catholic Christians there would be many who may have no objection to contraception and see it as responsible behaviour but who draw the line at prescribing contraceptives which are meant to be taken after fertilisation," he said.
David Jones, director of the Anscombe Bioethics Centre, the Roman Catholic institute in Oxford, said: "By these guidelines the FSRH is seeking deliberately to exclude people who have a conscientious objection to some or all forms of contraception from eligibility for the diploma and from membership of the faculty.
"This is a form of unjust discrimination against professionals on the basis of their personal beliefs and, indirectly, a form of discrimination against patients who share the same beliefs and who may wish to be treated by professionals with a sympathetic understanding of their position."