Mother of 10 to fight pill ruling in court

Press, 25 June 1983, Page 11

Mother of 10 to fight pill ruling in court

NZPA. London The controversy about British under-age, schoolgirls being given the pill by doctors will be tested in ,the High Court. A mother of 10 children has asked for a legally binding assurance that none of her daughters will be given contraceptives or an abortion without her agreement while they are under 16, the “Daily Mail” reports. The outcome of the hearing next month in London could affect the way family planning services are run. Mrs Victoria Gillick has led a campaign for four years to win the right for parents to be told of contraceptive advice to their children. Mrs Gillick, who has five daughters aged from three months to 13, has complained that doctors are aiding and abetting minors to break the law. “I am simolv a concerned

mother who wants this issue sorted out,” she said. “I don’t believe anyone can take away my rights as a parent over this.” Mrs Gillick is prepared to take out a second mortgage on her home in Cambridgeshire to fund the case. The challenge in the High Court will centre on a Department of Health circular sent out in 1981 which allowed doctors to give contraceptive advice to girls under the age of consent. Mrs Gillick’s move came as a result of a threat on Thursday to doctors that they would be struck off for telling parents of girls under 16 if their daughters sought advice on the pill or abortion. The threat was the result of a new ruling on patient confidentiality issued by the medical profession’s governing body, the General Medical Council. The council’s deputy re-

gistrar, Robert Gray, warned doctors who ignored the ruling that they would lay themselves open to disciplinary proceedings — including the risk of being removed from the medical register. In the ruling the council said that while attempts should be made to persuade the girl to involve her parents, if she refused, the doctor had no choice. But the member of Parliament for Exeter, Dr Adrian Rogers, said on Thursday that he would ignore the ruling and challenged the council to discipline him. “It is my policy to tell parents in these situations and I will continue to do so. This decision is a sin against children,” he said. Dr Rogers said that he intended to stand for election to the council to fight for the ruling to be reversed.