Midwives have traditionally been heroic women who helped others bring new life safely into the world. As far back as the Book of Exodus, their singular devotion to life was clear:
The king of Egypt told the Hebrew midwives, one of whom was called Shiphrah and the other Puah, "When you act as midwives for the Hebrew women, look on the birthstool: if it is a boym kill him; but if it is a girl, she may live." The midwives, however, feared God; they did not do as the king of Egypt had ordered them, but let the boys live. So the king of Egypt summoned the midwives and asked them, "Why have you done this, allowing the boys to live?" The midwives answered Pharaoh, "The Hebrew women are not like the Egyptian women. They are robust and give birth before the midwife arrives." Therefore God dealt well with the midwives; and the people multiplied and grew very numerous. And because the midwives feared God, God built up families for them (Exodus 1:15-21).
Unfortunately, this reputation not withstanding, most British midwives have long been diverted from the beauty of birth to the dirty work of aborting those babies who are unwanted, and now the government of England is forcing two experienced midwives to oversee these abortions despite their firm objections.
Both the midwives have served for over 20 years at the Southern General Hospital, caring for many thousands of mothers and babies. The case arose when the hospital demanded that all senior midwives must take responsibility for overseeing mid-term and late term abortions. Since 2008 the hospital has insisted that these abortions, mostly for suspected disability in the foetus, must be conducted on the labour ward, rather than the gynaecology ward where most early abortions are performed.
The midwives in the case, Miss Mary Doogan and Mrs Connie Wood, argued that they had never been required to supervise abortion procedures in the past, and that the hospital was asking them to be morally, medically and legally responsible for abortions. They argued that this conflicted with their profound objection to abortions and with the right to opt-out that is protected in the 1967 Abortion Act.
The ruling handed down at the end of February said that their objection is not covered by the "conscious clause" of the Abortion Act, allowing Lady Smith, the judge in the case, to exercise a tyrrany that Pharaoh himself couldn't manage. When even the fundamental issues of life and death are not covered by a conscious clause, a culture has pretty well lost its understanding of the human person. Thus we see on both sides of the pond a sifting of health-care personnel, so that those with ethics and respect for the dignity of the human person are shaken out before certification.
Ultimately, this will leave us and our health care in the hands of those who have a ghastly sense of ethics, and the draconian nature of bureacracy will oppress us even more thoroughly than was possible in ancient Egypt ... and we know how God dealt with them.
Comments