Pro-life organisation invited to advise UK government on sexual health

The Guardian reports that Life, the pro-life group opposed to abortion under all circumstances and which advocates abstinance as the only contraceptive choice, has been invited to be a member of the new sexual health forum. The British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS), which has provided pregnancy counselling services for over 40 years in the UK and was associated with the previous Independent Advisory Group on Sexual Health and HIV, has not been invited.

Life provides documents such as "The morning-after pill: Uncovering the truth" by John R Ling. It contains practical and evidence-based advice such as:

"What if you have already experienced early sexual intercourse? What if you have already taken the MAP (morning after pill)? The good news is that there is forgiveness, if we confess our sins. Christ died on the Cross to bear the punishment you and I deserve for any and every sin. Yes, God’s love is an accepting love. It is also a transforming love. He then wants you and me to live and witness for Him. The best route for you is to determine to abstain from now on – to acquire what is often called secondary, or reclaimed, virginity. Ask for God’s help in these matters, and continue asking until you receive it".

The UK Government considers an organisation that distributes such material worthy of a position advising on sexual health and HIV policy.

Evangelical Christian GP sacked from Advisory Council on Misue of Drugs for failing to declare authorship of anti-homosexual article

I have previously written about the misguided appointment of the evangelical Christian GP, Dr. Hans-Christian Raabe, to the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs.

A few days after my blog post on his views about homosexuality, he was sacked when the Council discovered that was an author of a study (devoid of any scientific merit) suggesting a link between homosexuality and paedophilia (which he had not declared on his application).

Dr Raabe invoked the usual tired canard about being discriminated against for his discriminating views: "In my case – holding on to traditional Christian views – I am being discriminated against by a Home Office Minister and am being sacrificed on the altar of political correctness".

Doctor who prosthelytises to patients refuses to accept warning from General Medical Council; gives interview he may regret

The General Practitioner, Richard Scott, has refused to accept any wrongdoing despite, in his own words, "a handful of complaints" for talking to patients about religious matters. The latest was brought about by a patient's mother who claimed the doctor "pushed religion" onto her son. Dr. Scott practises at the Bethesda Medical Centre in Margate, Kent, which is staffed by exclusively Christian doctors.

Dr. Scott at his surgery. Photo: Will Wintercross

The Daily Telegraph interview with Dr. Scott is fascinating to watch; it seems to show a doctor completely devoid of any insight or ability to admit (in the face of a letter from his regulatory body accusing him of harassment) even the slightest possibility that he might, just might, have acted inappropriately. It seems entirely lost upon him that there may frequently be a power-inequality between doctor and patient, particularly where patients are vulnerable, or that patients could be fearful of refusing his religious advice for fear this may prejudice their medical treatment. Given that the General Medical Council place heavy weight on whether the doctor has insight into his behaviour in decisions striking doctors from the register, he might well regret this interview. His sense of personal righteousness reminds me of an interview with Andrew Wakefield who similarly cannot countenance any shred of evidence that his fraudulant behaviour harmed others.

Instead of accepting a written warning, Dr. Scott has chosen to employ the services of the Christian Legal Centre to escalate what is currently a relatively minor professional censure. The Christian Legal Centre provides such valuable services as predicting civil unrest in the wake of the sacking of a sex therapist who discriminated against homosexual couples, and supporting Blasphemy Laws in the case of a Christian lady offended by an art installation of Jesus with an erection.

General Medical Council guidelines on personal beliefs of doctors are available here for Dr. Scott's perusal before any forthcoming hearings. The guidelines state that "You must not express to your patients your personal beliefs, including political, religious or moral beliefs, in ways that exploit their vulnerability or that are likely to cause them distress (paragraph 33)". It seems Dr. Scott's prosthelytising has caused distress in several cases, substantiating the charge by the GMC of bringing his profession into disrepute. Doctors should stick to their area of expertise and not dispense religous advice. After all, vicars, imams and scientology counsellors do not attempt to practice medicine.