Page 5, 14th November 1975

14th November 1975
Page 5
Page 5, 14th November 1975 — BPAS and honesty

Report an error

Noticed an error on this page?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it.


Locations: London, Leicester


Related articles


Page 5 from 7th November 1975

Anti-abortion Mp Hits Back At Bpas

Page 4 from 15th August 1980

B Pas

Page 5 from 26th December 1975

‘sack Late Abortion Doctor’

Page 2 from 26th November 2004

Questions For St John-stevas

Page 5 from 21st November 1975

BPAS and honesty

Mrs Diane Munday, who is Public Relations Officer to the British Pregnancy Advisory Service. has said (November 7) that your report concerning the earnings of BPAS doctors was based on a misunderstanding. Having stated that there was a misunderstanding, it is a pity that Mrs Monday appears to be so coy about disclosing exactly what the true facts are. On October 4, 1974, there appeared an article in The General Practitioner about the activities of BPAS (so unstinting in its praise, incidentally. that it might ,almost serve as a-BPAS publicity handout). In this a BPAS doctor is reported to have said that he was paid £7.50 per abortion (though after he had carried out 50 in a month, the fee dropped to £6 a bulk discount, as it were).

Since the doctor is stated to have been carrying out roughly 25 operations a week his total income from this source would be around £7,700 a year. The doctor, so the report goes on "agreed that this sounded a lot, but pointed out that no surgeon does mtve than one day a week (so that thee are no opportunities for amassir fortunes)' .

Perhaps Mrs Munday would answer these questions: (a) Is the report in The General Practitioner true? (b) If untrue, was it ever publicly contradicted'? If so, where and when? (c) If true, in what other: sphere can one earn £7,700 a year for one day's work a week? Martin Mears 92 High Street,

Gorlesion, Norfolk

Diane Munday (November 7) refutes the suggestion that

gynaecologists working for the British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS) earn up to £25,000 a year. Presumably these gynaecologists do their utmost to ensure that the taking of unborn children's lives is made as cheap as possible.

However, she makes no attempt to deny the far more dameging claim that only 12 per cent of BPAS counsellors were professionally qualified social workers or nurses. Could it be that they cannot afford professional fees? Nor does she make any attempt to deny the claim that the 13PAS makes no attempt to carry out an inquiry into the social and en

vironmental conditions ot women to whom they grant abortions.

In other words the BPAS has been flaunting the law and operating a policy of abortion on demand.

how right the authors of "Babies for Burning" were in their investigation of the private sector of the abortion industry. Let's hope Parliament acts swiftly to end these abuses.

G. F. Walker 89 Bonchurch Street,


No colour bias

i have read Barbara Kentish's survey "Where Creed and Colour Matter" (November 7) in full. The Catholic Teachers' Federation have never had any evidence that a baptised Catholic child has been refused admission to a Catholic secondary school on grounds of colour alone. Because of shortage of places, yes.

Catholic schools exist to preach the Faith to Catholic children as part of the pastoral work of the Church. Should a baptised Catholic child be refused admission on grounds of colour, this would be abhorrent to the members of the Catholic Teachers' Federation.

Regarding the Creed of pupils in Catholic secondary schools, I would draw the attention of both Mrs Kentish and your readers to the Articles of Government of Voluntary Aided Special Agreement Schools: "The religious observance and instruction in the school shall (subject to the provisions of the 1944 Education Act) be in accordance with the practices, rights and doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church.

Noel Lawn Hon Pro, Catholic Teachers' Federation. St John's School,

Green Street, Newham, London, E13.

blog comments powered by Disqus