Mattock Lane Clinic Buffer Zone
Elizabeth Amzil 157 Saint Paul’s Close Ealing W5 3JZ lizamzil@btinternet.com Thursday 18th January, 2018Cc Rupra Huq MP Julian Bell, leader of the cabinet Marie Stopes West London Centre Ealling, ManagerDear Sir or Madam,Re: proposed buffer zone outside the Marie Stopes West London Centre, Ealing, Clinic in Mattock Lane. ‘Have your say.’Aspects not covered within the scope of this letter: Considerations such as barriers to information – language, culture and religion as barriers to information, are not specifically discussed in this letter. The perspectives I come from are the right to free speech, the right to freedom of information, transparency, and the right to make fundamental decisions affecting health and well-being about one’s own body, all within agreed societal parameters. Today, in retrospect, I have the luxury and can indulge to say ‘thank goodness there were people outside the Ealing Marie Stopes Clinic, in Mattock Lane. Otherwise, my lovely grandson would not be with us today. I also doubt that my wonderful daughter-in-law and hard-working son would even be in the very good and successful marriage they have today, with their additional second child, my granddaughter, if it hadn’t been for additional information’.A couple, any couple, getting together and building and sharing everything together, with all it entails, is a pretty tough ‘job’ to take on and always was. Therefore, weighing all risks and making the right decisions and being able to live with them years later without regrets, well-being and health intact, is crucially important. A person finding themselves in an impossible situation without help, or to have to go through an event imposed on them against their will and bringing down their health and sense of well-being in the process because of the belief of others is unethical and immoral in today’s transparent society. Yet, for the protestors outside The Clinic to have been able to approach and change the minds of a young couple over such a fundamental issue as bringing new life, another human being into this world, there must have been elements of doubt in their minds which were only uncovered after more information was given to them by the protestors and subsequently by medical professionals.What a great shame The Clinic believe they need to resort to a buffer zone. On the contrary, The Clinic should embrace conversation and discussion, not bar it which would do nothing for their PR image.If I was to run such a clinic, I would want clients to hear points from all perspectives to be covered in discussions with the clients before any decisions are finalised. Why doesn’t the leadership team in The Clinic set up an office somewhere for the protestors (albeit they should be an official representative of a registered organisation and background checks made) to have a discussion with each client as part of the clinical routine in deciding to terminate or not? They could be given a set amount of time to convey information. The ‘script’ with information and language should be vetted first, by an independent committee, with a view to allowing some margins depending on which way the conversation might go.Clients could be asked to sign a declaration that they have engaged in all relevant conversations to make their responses known to their medical team in The Clinic. This could only add to good practice carried out at The Clinic. Obviously, this is a very complex matter. Clinic users are from a wide range of backgrounds, vulnerabilities and age-groups, dangers even, so perhaps there should be different scripts that the protestors and committee could prepare to match the vulnerability, age group and background of the client. The client’s health, legal rights and emotional well-being should be at the heart of the conversation and discussion. This could be difficult for members of organisations such as the Pro Life Society because they put at heart the welfare of the unborn child. This in any event could still be a workable situation as long as there is a trained medical biologist or consultant who can give information on a separate occasion, from the other end of the spectrum, in a separate conversation and discussion.The Clinic charge enough in their fees and they are in the profession of helping people. I believe it wouldn’t take too much effort to recruit experts, whether volunteering or to be paid, and make time for clients to have the opportunity to hear all perspectives and it does not have to be in jargonised terminology but conveyed in plain everyday language. The challenge is to find the funding sources which should be compared to the cost of establishing a buffer zone.Moreover, I have no axe to grind, as another family member did use The Clinic years ago. After I found out about it, years later, I totally supported her decision in her context. She also considered what the protestor had to say at that time. For her there was no doubt that she did the right thing by terminating. Today, she has a happy and full family life, is successful, and baby number two is on the way.I believe in people having as much information as possible in order to make powerful, informed decisions about their own personal lives, by removing as much doubt – hidden, sub-conscious or overt – as possible.There is no blanket panacea in these matters as everyone is individually different.The people who keep vigil should get their act together, wax, perhaps, less lyrical, if indeed that is what they are doing, and convey information from their perspective within agreed parameters. I think they are quite right however to point out that a life being terminated, is indeed the end of a potential human being, the end of a potential baby (and all the connotations that the loaded noun holds in the public domain, for the general public and, more importantly, for the emotionally involved individual). The current situation is unacceptable, but that is all there is available at present from the other end of the spectrum. Random approaches are made by protestors to random clients, which is far removed from an ideal situation. Yet, this is how we have my much loved and happy grandson around us today, by this very approach. The very same approach also revealed the survival of an informed, determined personality of a young woman, resulting in good health and well-being today.The practitioners at The Clinic should not feel affronted because a client questions if they are doing something wrong just because they were faced with issues, outside the building, raised by a protestor. Clients should have a safe place to raise issues if they themselves feel affronted by anyone at any time. It is what happens with that question. It cannot be ignored no matter how close to the legal cut-off date. Quite rightly counselling is offered at The Clinic. Is psychological help comprehensive enough? I believe other perspectives have a place at the table too.To return to the issue of language used: I as an individual have often thought about how I personally would have felt about a termination. Today, I happen to think – depending on the stage of foetal development – that a legal termination can be thought of as similar to murder or manslaughter, especially with all the technological advancements to help pregnancies and birth. I also happen to believe that in the very early stages it is right to think of the development as a collection of cells and that a termination can be and is ethically and morally endurable. These are however my own personal conclusions, drawn, I might add, in retrospect (and I can state them courtesy via the freedom of speech). Today, I am simply glad I did not take a termination option at any time, regardless of all the difficulties life threw at me. Had my circumstances been much more difficult I might have found a termination was the only way. Right now, I have the luxury of holding my beliefs, based on wide-ranging information.The parameters for a conversation and discussion held between a client and an organisational representative should be set by a forum comprising:clinic users past and present, of differing age groups, or advocatespractitioners from The Clinic, people from organisations such as The Pro Life Societya representative from a pro choice groupan NHS senior nurse from a maternity ward, midwife or consultanta social worker from the adults’ departmenta social worker from the children’s departmentparents a representative from Barnardo’s or similara teacher from a primary schoola teacher from a secondary schoola students’ advocate or counsellor from a college or universitya counsellor practitioner with a strong, trained, psychological backgrounda lawyer from the field of UK law and foetal status an MPa local councillor At least 5 perspectives should be made available to the client – 1. Client’s medical health and well-being, 2. The procedure at The Clinic, 3. pro choice, 4. the legal status of the foetus, and 5. Pro-life, (not necessarily in that order) with a 6th personal, counselling perspective offered as routine. All options and outcomes should be made transparent for the client to consider and for possible alternatives to be concluded either as acceptable or to be ruled out by the client, eg, family help, adoption, possibility of future regrets and so forth. If the client has further questions, relevant information should be given in order to clarify issues and help the client to arrive at a firm decision, eg, a conversation with a termination nurse. Principle core beliefs should be stated to the client before proceeding with a conversation based on a particular perspective. For example, the legal perspective gives 3 statements in its overview, ie, a foetus is not a person (according to UK law). The client will be in a better position to make an autonomous, informed choice, weighing up personal health and risks, responsibilities, well-being and personal goals and expectations against the given information. These conversations and discussions could be carried out at a GP venue or spare quiet space bookable at a medical centre or hospital, away from The Clinic.Although legally pro-life members have no interest or rights over a client’s choice, nevertheless they would have been given an opportunity, as good will on the part of The Clinic, and society in general, to put forward their point of view for the client to consider. Pro-life supporters and organisations will then have to accept the situation regarding whatever decision the client makes. They should no longer stand outside the building randomly approaching clients in such an ad hoc way regardless of the client’s feelings, situation or vulnerabilities. If it persists, it should be treated as a breach of the peace and harassment. Pro-life supporters should find different methods to promote their campaign once Pro-life representatives are in place in The Clinic. As a good will gesture made by The Clinic, by inviting organisations in, there would be no need for a buffer zone which would set an unwanted precedent. I hope this letter will be considered within the context of ‘having your say’ offered by Ealing Council.Regards, Elizabeth Amzil (BSc hons, Cert in Counselling, PGCE, Ed Dip dist., Ed MA)
Elizabeth Amzil ● 2937d7 Comments ● 2937d