The following is a brilliant article from the BBC web page 19/1/2012 well worth a read ++
Elderly people with dementia are more likely to suffer falls if they are given anti-depressants by care home staff, a study claims.
Many dementia patients also suffer from depression and drugs known as selective serotonin uptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are frequently prescribed.
But the British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology reports that the risk of injuries from falls was tripled.
The Alzheimer's Society called for more research into alternative treatments.
The risk of falls following treatment with older anti-depressants is well established, as the medication can cause side effects such as dizziness and unsteadiness.
It had been hoped that a move to newer SSRI-type drugs would reduce this problems, but the latest research, from the Erasmus University Medical Center in Rotterdam, appears to show the reverse.
'Worrying'
Dr Carolyn Sterke recorded the daily drug use and records of falls in 248 nursing home residents over a two-year period.
The average age of the residents was 82, and the records suggested that 152 of them had suffered a total of 683 falls.
The consequences of falls were relatively high, with 220 resulting in injuries including hip fractures and other broken bones - and one resident died following a fall.
The risk of having an injury-causing fall was three times higher in residents taking SSRIs compared with those not taking the drug, and this risk rose further if the patient was being given sedative drugs as well.
Dr Sterke said that these risks needed to be taken into account when assessing whether anti-depressants were required.
She said: "Physicians should be cautious in prescribing SSRIs to older people with dementia, even at low doses."
Professor Clive Ballard, from the Alzheimer's Society, said it was "worrying" that such a commonly prescribed anti-depressant was causing increased risk.
He said: "It is important to highlight any aspect of care that might be causing risk to a person with dementia. We want to ensure that people with the condition are always receiving the best care possible.
"More research is now needed to understand why this anti-depressant is having this effect on people with dementia and if there is an alternative treatment for depression that they could be prescribed.
"One in three people over 65 will die with dementia yet research into the condition continues to be drastically underfunded. We must invest now.'
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
Sunday, January 15, 2012
HMG £185m bailout for NHS claims fund
So the government has been forced to give the NHS Litigation Authority £185m until April to cover the cost of claims and legal fees.
It comes after payouts have trebled over the last decade to £863m last year this
rise has been blamed on a boom in no-win, no-fee cases.
Well at the end of the day this is £185m that will not be going to front line NHS so we all suffer ! time to end this blame culture .
It comes after payouts have trebled over the last decade to £863m last year this
rise has been blamed on a boom in no-win, no-fee cases.
Well at the end of the day this is £185m that will not be going to front line NHS so we all suffer ! time to end this blame culture .
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
The spartacus-report
Here is a link to this important report
http://diaryofabenefitscrounger.blogspot.com/2012/01/i-support-spartacus-report.html
http://diaryofabenefitscrounger.blogspot.com/2012/01/i-support-spartacus-report.html
Sunday, January 8, 2012
Evidence of neglect and abuse at a private nursing home in Essex
The following article is from the BBC web site , yet again we have it would appear neglect and abuse at a private nursing home how much longer will we as a society allow this to happen ?
Evidence of neglect and abuse at a private nursing home in Essex has been uncovered by a BBC investigation.
In August 2011 Partridge Care Centre, in Harlow, was at the centre of a police inquiry after three people were taken to hospital with "diabetes related problems".
Two women in their 80s died, although Essex Police dropped the investigation saying there was no evidence of "any relevant criminal offences".
The home's owner Rushcliffe Care Limited acknowledged there had been problems in the past, but claimed it had taken steps to make sure residents' "health and well-being are paramount".
But documents seen by BBC Essex show there were serious problems at the home before the police investigation.
Partridge Care Centre is a residential nursing home specialising in looking after people with a range of neurological conditions.
It is run by Rushcliffe Care, which also owns 23 other homes.
The centre has rooms for 117 residents, although at the moment it is less than half full, and presently employs about 120 staff.
Former worker at the home Graham Flack said he had witnessed abuse and neglect of residents during his time there.
"There was an incident where a certain member of staff was sitting on a resident, who was quite challenging… I would say restraining someone like you see on telly via the police," he said.
"At the end of the day no-one deserves to be held or pushed in any form or manner. It was not nice, not nice."
Lesley Minchin's mother Eileen Jarvis suffered from dementia and required specialist care.
She moved into the home in February 2011, with instructions that she should not be left alone because she was likely to fall.
According to a letter from the centre's manager to the family, Mrs Jarvis was left unattended during a shift change.
She got up, fell and broke her hip. It was two hours before staff at the home called the emergency services.
Mrs Minchin said she had got to the home at the same time as the paramedics.
'Screamed out'
"She was screaming out in pain when I arrived there and they were trying to ask her where the pain was," Mrs Minchin said.
"She said she didn't know but was hurting. When they touched her leg, she just screamed out."
Mrs Minchin claimed many of the problems at the home were caused by a lack of employees.
"The staff, on the whole, were very, very good. There just wasn't enough of them," she said.
The Care Quality Commission has carried out a series of inspections at Partridge Care Centre since May.
In the most recent report published in December, the health watchdog said it had minor concerns over staffing levels.
"Overall we found that there were sufficient numbers of staff available in the home, however there was a lack of effective leadership and deployment due to the large numbers of agency staff working there."
The CQC also found failings in four of the five basic standards during this inspection, including concerns about whether residents were safe in the home and whether they are receiving appropriate treatment.
Written warnings
BBC Essex has seen a report written after a surprise visit to the home by two managers in May 2011.
They found that several staff were asleep while on duty, a serious disciplinary offence.
The managers found one resident lying on an unmade bed that was smeared with faeces. Another was found sitting on the floor and had soiled themselves.
Other residents were found wandering around on their own, yet more were found in bed fully clothed.
The building was said to have smelt of urine and one of the units had no lights on.
Further documents show that some of the staff involved were only given written warnings.
An internal audit carried out by staff at Partridge Care Centre in July found that most of the residents' rooms were dirty.
Of the 21 homes run by Rushcliffe Care Limited, eight of them are failing at least one of the basic standards expected by the CQC.
'Unsubstantiated allegations'
According to its accounts, in the past year the company posted a £1.6m profit.
In a statement, the company said: "Following a series of unfortunate locally mismanaged events at Partridge Care Centre over the past nine months, Rushcliffe Care Group have taken measures so that the health and wellbeing of the centres' residents are paramount.
"We are unable to comment on individual unsubstantiated allegations, which have been made, but we... take all complaints and allegations seriously and when brought to our attention they are dealt with promptly and fairly."
Essex County Council said it had suspended the placement of residents at the home after the hospital referrals related to diabetes in August.
In a statement, Ann Naylor, cabinet member for adult health, said: "The formal suspension of placements at Partridge Care Centre will remain in place, in consultation with Rushcliffe Care management, until such time that partners are fully satisfied that sustainable improvements in the wellbeing and care of residents have been achieved."
Evidence of neglect and abuse at a private nursing home in Essex has been uncovered by a BBC investigation.
In August 2011 Partridge Care Centre, in Harlow, was at the centre of a police inquiry after three people were taken to hospital with "diabetes related problems".
Two women in their 80s died, although Essex Police dropped the investigation saying there was no evidence of "any relevant criminal offences".
The home's owner Rushcliffe Care Limited acknowledged there had been problems in the past, but claimed it had taken steps to make sure residents' "health and well-being are paramount".
But documents seen by BBC Essex show there were serious problems at the home before the police investigation.
Partridge Care Centre is a residential nursing home specialising in looking after people with a range of neurological conditions.
It is run by Rushcliffe Care, which also owns 23 other homes.
The centre has rooms for 117 residents, although at the moment it is less than half full, and presently employs about 120 staff.
Former worker at the home Graham Flack said he had witnessed abuse and neglect of residents during his time there.
"There was an incident where a certain member of staff was sitting on a resident, who was quite challenging… I would say restraining someone like you see on telly via the police," he said.
"At the end of the day no-one deserves to be held or pushed in any form or manner. It was not nice, not nice."
Lesley Minchin's mother Eileen Jarvis suffered from dementia and required specialist care.
She moved into the home in February 2011, with instructions that she should not be left alone because she was likely to fall.
According to a letter from the centre's manager to the family, Mrs Jarvis was left unattended during a shift change.
She got up, fell and broke her hip. It was two hours before staff at the home called the emergency services.
Mrs Minchin said she had got to the home at the same time as the paramedics.
'Screamed out'
"She was screaming out in pain when I arrived there and they were trying to ask her where the pain was," Mrs Minchin said.
"She said she didn't know but was hurting. When they touched her leg, she just screamed out."
Mrs Minchin claimed many of the problems at the home were caused by a lack of employees.
"The staff, on the whole, were very, very good. There just wasn't enough of them," she said.
The Care Quality Commission has carried out a series of inspections at Partridge Care Centre since May.
In the most recent report published in December, the health watchdog said it had minor concerns over staffing levels.
"Overall we found that there were sufficient numbers of staff available in the home, however there was a lack of effective leadership and deployment due to the large numbers of agency staff working there."
The CQC also found failings in four of the five basic standards during this inspection, including concerns about whether residents were safe in the home and whether they are receiving appropriate treatment.
Written warnings
BBC Essex has seen a report written after a surprise visit to the home by two managers in May 2011.
They found that several staff were asleep while on duty, a serious disciplinary offence.
The managers found one resident lying on an unmade bed that was smeared with faeces. Another was found sitting on the floor and had soiled themselves.
Other residents were found wandering around on their own, yet more were found in bed fully clothed.
The building was said to have smelt of urine and one of the units had no lights on.
Further documents show that some of the staff involved were only given written warnings.
An internal audit carried out by staff at Partridge Care Centre in July found that most of the residents' rooms were dirty.
Of the 21 homes run by Rushcliffe Care Limited, eight of them are failing at least one of the basic standards expected by the CQC.
'Unsubstantiated allegations'
According to its accounts, in the past year the company posted a £1.6m profit.
In a statement, the company said: "Following a series of unfortunate locally mismanaged events at Partridge Care Centre over the past nine months, Rushcliffe Care Group have taken measures so that the health and wellbeing of the centres' residents are paramount.
"We are unable to comment on individual unsubstantiated allegations, which have been made, but we... take all complaints and allegations seriously and when brought to our attention they are dealt with promptly and fairly."
Essex County Council said it had suspended the placement of residents at the home after the hospital referrals related to diabetes in August.
In a statement, Ann Naylor, cabinet member for adult health, said: "The formal suspension of placements at Partridge Care Centre will remain in place, in consultation with Rushcliffe Care management, until such time that partners are fully satisfied that sustainable improvements in the wellbeing and care of residents have been achieved."
Tuesday, December 20, 2011
Charitable bonds explained
Excellent article by Mr Cheng well worth a read
By Paul Cheng
Head of CAF Venturesome, Charities Aid Foundation
The economic situation is getting tougher for all of us - and charities are no exception.
Central and local government funding for charitable organisations is being cut back as a result of the drive to reduce the deficit. Donations from members of the public are also coming under increasing pressure.
At exactly the same time that some traditional sources of funding are drying up, more and more people are looking to charities to provide desperately needed support and services.
It is because charities are determined to meet this need that many are increasingly looking for new and innovative ways to raise funds.
One idea that is increasingly being looked at is the issuing of charitable bonds which provide a form of long-term debt to expand their work.
How the bonds work
A charity or social enterprise may be able to issue bonds if it has a viable underlying source of revenue with which to repay the bondholders. These may include a chain of charity shops, payments by result for the delivery of a public service, or a long track record in raising funds from a large donor base.
As this form of finance is still emerging in the social sector, there are various types of bonds in existence.
The bond issued by Allia, for example, comprises an innovative investment - suitable for retail investors - to the housing association Places for People, which repays the loan with interest and additionally provides a grant to a charity. This bond allows individuals to invest as little as £100 per bond.
Another organisation, Investing For Good, arranges charity bonds and is currently assisting Scope, the disability charity, to become one of the first UK charities to enter the capital markets.
It is piloting a £20m bond programme operating similarly to corporate bond products and it is hoped that the programme will allow Scope to expand its income generating activities, such as its network of charity shops which generate long-term sustainable sources of income for its work with disabled people.
Triodos Bank is assisting the community interest company Bristol Together plan a bond issue worth £1.6m. The first £600,000 was bought by a charitable foundation and the second tranche of £1m will be sold to private individuals to attract Community Investment Tax Relief, which allows investors to reduce their tax bills by 5% a year for five years.
Risk
The guarantees offered to investors with charitable bonds vary, but are primarily based on the track record of the underlying investment, so it is important to understand this in order to gauge the level of investment risk.
Currently, with the exception of the Allia/Places for People bond, investment in charitable bonds is largely limited to charitable trusts and wealthy philanthropic investors.
It is hoped that in the future there will be a growing number of charitable bond products available with well-established track records, which will allow more widespread investment from the general public. This could be invested directly or through special investment products like pension funds.
One particularly interesting type of charitable bond is the Social Impact Bond (SIB) pioneered by Social Finance.
This contract is where the public sector pays the private sector to secure a substantial improvement in the way of life for a specific group, in order to reduce the public sector's costs in the long-run.
While the contract is ordinarily made with the private sector, the organisations that deliver the services on the ground are often charities or social enterprises.
Impact
Unlike traditional bonds, SIBs do not have a fixed rate of return as financial return depends on the achievement of specific social outcomes set at the start of the bond issue. The higher the social impact, the higher the return earned by the private sector.
Under a SIB, the charity sector organisation bears no financial risk as the repayment is commonly between the public and private sector. The public sector pays if, and only if, the intervention is successful.
One of the first SIBs was launched in 2010 by the St Giles Trust, a charity providing access to housing, training and jobs for ex-offenders.
This SIB has been designed to reduce reoffending among male prisoners leaving Peterborough prison who have served a sentence of less than 12 months. During the scheme, intensive support will be provided to 3,000 short-term prisoners over a six-year period, both inside prison and after release.
If this initiative reduces reoffending by 7.5%, or more, investors will receive a share of the long-term savings to the government.
If the SIB delivers a drop in reoffending beyond this threshold, investors will receive more money for the greater the success, up to a maximum of 13%.
However, if reoffending is not reduced by at least 7.5%, the investors will receive no recompense at all.
Charities have a long track record of innovation and charitable bonds are a sign of this.
Hopefully, they will go some way to plugging the gap left by the decline in some traditional sources of funding. At the same time they could provide great opportunities for people wanting to invest their money for a return, while helping to make a real difference at the same time.
By Paul Cheng
Head of CAF Venturesome, Charities Aid Foundation
The economic situation is getting tougher for all of us - and charities are no exception.
Central and local government funding for charitable organisations is being cut back as a result of the drive to reduce the deficit. Donations from members of the public are also coming under increasing pressure.
At exactly the same time that some traditional sources of funding are drying up, more and more people are looking to charities to provide desperately needed support and services.
It is because charities are determined to meet this need that many are increasingly looking for new and innovative ways to raise funds.
One idea that is increasingly being looked at is the issuing of charitable bonds which provide a form of long-term debt to expand their work.
How the bonds work
A charity or social enterprise may be able to issue bonds if it has a viable underlying source of revenue with which to repay the bondholders. These may include a chain of charity shops, payments by result for the delivery of a public service, or a long track record in raising funds from a large donor base.
As this form of finance is still emerging in the social sector, there are various types of bonds in existence.
The bond issued by Allia, for example, comprises an innovative investment - suitable for retail investors - to the housing association Places for People, which repays the loan with interest and additionally provides a grant to a charity. This bond allows individuals to invest as little as £100 per bond.
Another organisation, Investing For Good, arranges charity bonds and is currently assisting Scope, the disability charity, to become one of the first UK charities to enter the capital markets.
It is piloting a £20m bond programme operating similarly to corporate bond products and it is hoped that the programme will allow Scope to expand its income generating activities, such as its network of charity shops which generate long-term sustainable sources of income for its work with disabled people.
Triodos Bank is assisting the community interest company Bristol Together plan a bond issue worth £1.6m. The first £600,000 was bought by a charitable foundation and the second tranche of £1m will be sold to private individuals to attract Community Investment Tax Relief, which allows investors to reduce their tax bills by 5% a year for five years.
Risk
The guarantees offered to investors with charitable bonds vary, but are primarily based on the track record of the underlying investment, so it is important to understand this in order to gauge the level of investment risk.
Currently, with the exception of the Allia/Places for People bond, investment in charitable bonds is largely limited to charitable trusts and wealthy philanthropic investors.
It is hoped that in the future there will be a growing number of charitable bond products available with well-established track records, which will allow more widespread investment from the general public. This could be invested directly or through special investment products like pension funds.
One particularly interesting type of charitable bond is the Social Impact Bond (SIB) pioneered by Social Finance.
This contract is where the public sector pays the private sector to secure a substantial improvement in the way of life for a specific group, in order to reduce the public sector's costs in the long-run.
While the contract is ordinarily made with the private sector, the organisations that deliver the services on the ground are often charities or social enterprises.
Impact
Unlike traditional bonds, SIBs do not have a fixed rate of return as financial return depends on the achievement of specific social outcomes set at the start of the bond issue. The higher the social impact, the higher the return earned by the private sector.
Under a SIB, the charity sector organisation bears no financial risk as the repayment is commonly between the public and private sector. The public sector pays if, and only if, the intervention is successful.
One of the first SIBs was launched in 2010 by the St Giles Trust, a charity providing access to housing, training and jobs for ex-offenders.
This SIB has been designed to reduce reoffending among male prisoners leaving Peterborough prison who have served a sentence of less than 12 months. During the scheme, intensive support will be provided to 3,000 short-term prisoners over a six-year period, both inside prison and after release.
If this initiative reduces reoffending by 7.5%, or more, investors will receive a share of the long-term savings to the government.
If the SIB delivers a drop in reoffending beyond this threshold, investors will receive more money for the greater the success, up to a maximum of 13%.
However, if reoffending is not reduced by at least 7.5%, the investors will receive no recompense at all.
Charities have a long track record of innovation and charitable bonds are a sign of this.
Hopefully, they will go some way to plugging the gap left by the decline in some traditional sources of funding. At the same time they could provide great opportunities for people wanting to invest their money for a return, while helping to make a real difference at the same time.
Saturday, December 10, 2011
The Green Benches: 10 reasons why Cameron will gain politically from ...
The Green Benches: 10 reasons why Cameron will gain politically from ...: David Cameron by vetoing the a prospective EU treaty last night has taken one step closer to winning the General Election of 2015 for lots o...
Friday, December 9, 2011
Abortion 'does not raise' mental health risk
A great article by Jane Dreaper well worth a read
Abortion 'does not raise' mental health risk
By Jane Dreaper
Health correspondent, BBC News
Abortion does not raise the risk of a woman suffering mental health problems, a major review by experts concludes.
Data from 44 studies showed women with an unwanted pregnancy have a higher incidence of mental health problems in general.
This is not affected by whether or not they have an abortion or give birth.
But anti-abortion campaigners said the review sought to "minimise" the psychological effect of terminating a pregnancy.
Experts from the National Collaborating Centre for Mental Health (NCCMH) used the same research methods they use to assess evidence on other mental health issues for NICE.
The work - funded by the Department of Health - came after concerns that abortion may adversely affect a woman's mental health.
Usually, a woman's risk of suffering common disorders such as anxiety or depression would be around 11-12%.
But the researchers said this rate was around three times higher in women with unwanted pregnancies.
'Equal risks'
The director of NCCMH, Prof Tim Kendall, said: "It could be that these women have a mental health problem before the pregnancy.
"On the other hand, it could be the unwanted pregnancy that's causing the problem.
"Or both explanations could be true. We can't be absolutely sure from the studies whether that's the case - but common sense would say it's quite likely to be both.
"The evidence shows though that whether these women have abortions - or go on to give birth - their risk of having mental health problems will not increase.
"They carry roughly equal risks.
"We believe this is the most comprehensive and detailed review of the mental health outcomes of abortion to date worldwide."
Prof Kendall said many previous studies had failed to adequately control for instances when women previously had mental health problems.
After a project which involved a three-month consultation, the researchers believe it would not "be fruitful" to carry out further studies into how pregnancies are resolved.
They say future work should concentrate on the mental health needs associated with an unwanted pregnancy.
Support need
Dr Roch Cantwell, a consultant perinatal psychiatrist who chaired the steering group, said the review was called for in 2008.
He said: "At that time, the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) issued a position statement saying the evidence on abortion and mental health was imperfect and conflicting.
"We all recognise abortion is a very sensitive and emotive topic. Our aim was not to debate the moral and ethical issues, but to focus on the available scientific evidence."
The scope of the review excluded reactions such as guilt, shame and regret - although these were considered important - and also assessments of mental state within 90 days of an abortion.
This was because the research was not about "transient reactions to a stressful event".
Sophie Corlett, director of external relations at the mental health charity Mind, said: "It is important that medical professionals are given the correct information to provide support for all women, but particularly those with a pre-existing history of mental health problems.
"This study makes it absolutely clear that this group is at the greatest risk of developing post-pregnancy mental health problems and should be given extra support in light of this."
Dr Kate Guthrie, speaking for RCOG, said: "Abortion, including aftercare, is an essential part of women's healthcare services, alongside access to contraception and family planning information."
'False belief'
However, a spokeswoman for the ProLife Alliance said: "Once again the politics of abortion blinds those who should be rigorously objective in assessing epidemiological evidence.
"This is a pick-and-mix report trying to minimise the psychological effects of termination of pregnancy in a way which does our so-called medical experts little credit."
And Dr Peter Saunders, chief executive of the Christian Medical Fellowship, said: "This new review shows that abortion does not improve mental health outcomes for women with unplanned pregnancies, despite 98% of the 200,000 abortions being carried out in this country each year on mental health grounds.
"This means that when doctors authorise abortions in order to protect a woman's mental health they are doing so on the basis of a false belief not supported by the medical evidence.
"In other words the vast majority of abortions in this country are technically illegal."
Public Health Minister Anne Milton said: "We are pleased to see the conclusions of this important review.
"The findings will be one of the many sources of information that we will use to inform our sexual health document that will be published next year.
"What is clear is that having an unwanted pregnancy has implications for people's mental health and wellbeing."
Abortion 'does not raise' mental health risk
By Jane Dreaper
Health correspondent, BBC News
Abortion does not raise the risk of a woman suffering mental health problems, a major review by experts concludes.
Data from 44 studies showed women with an unwanted pregnancy have a higher incidence of mental health problems in general.
This is not affected by whether or not they have an abortion or give birth.
But anti-abortion campaigners said the review sought to "minimise" the psychological effect of terminating a pregnancy.
Experts from the National Collaborating Centre for Mental Health (NCCMH) used the same research methods they use to assess evidence on other mental health issues for NICE.
The work - funded by the Department of Health - came after concerns that abortion may adversely affect a woman's mental health.
Usually, a woman's risk of suffering common disorders such as anxiety or depression would be around 11-12%.
But the researchers said this rate was around three times higher in women with unwanted pregnancies.
'Equal risks'
The director of NCCMH, Prof Tim Kendall, said: "It could be that these women have a mental health problem before the pregnancy.
"On the other hand, it could be the unwanted pregnancy that's causing the problem.
"Or both explanations could be true. We can't be absolutely sure from the studies whether that's the case - but common sense would say it's quite likely to be both.
"The evidence shows though that whether these women have abortions - or go on to give birth - their risk of having mental health problems will not increase.
"They carry roughly equal risks.
"We believe this is the most comprehensive and detailed review of the mental health outcomes of abortion to date worldwide."
Prof Kendall said many previous studies had failed to adequately control for instances when women previously had mental health problems.
After a project which involved a three-month consultation, the researchers believe it would not "be fruitful" to carry out further studies into how pregnancies are resolved.
They say future work should concentrate on the mental health needs associated with an unwanted pregnancy.
Support need
Dr Roch Cantwell, a consultant perinatal psychiatrist who chaired the steering group, said the review was called for in 2008.
He said: "At that time, the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) issued a position statement saying the evidence on abortion and mental health was imperfect and conflicting.
"We all recognise abortion is a very sensitive and emotive topic. Our aim was not to debate the moral and ethical issues, but to focus on the available scientific evidence."
The scope of the review excluded reactions such as guilt, shame and regret - although these were considered important - and also assessments of mental state within 90 days of an abortion.
This was because the research was not about "transient reactions to a stressful event".
Sophie Corlett, director of external relations at the mental health charity Mind, said: "It is important that medical professionals are given the correct information to provide support for all women, but particularly those with a pre-existing history of mental health problems.
"This study makes it absolutely clear that this group is at the greatest risk of developing post-pregnancy mental health problems and should be given extra support in light of this."
Dr Kate Guthrie, speaking for RCOG, said: "Abortion, including aftercare, is an essential part of women's healthcare services, alongside access to contraception and family planning information."
'False belief'
However, a spokeswoman for the ProLife Alliance said: "Once again the politics of abortion blinds those who should be rigorously objective in assessing epidemiological evidence.
"This is a pick-and-mix report trying to minimise the psychological effects of termination of pregnancy in a way which does our so-called medical experts little credit."
And Dr Peter Saunders, chief executive of the Christian Medical Fellowship, said: "This new review shows that abortion does not improve mental health outcomes for women with unplanned pregnancies, despite 98% of the 200,000 abortions being carried out in this country each year on mental health grounds.
"This means that when doctors authorise abortions in order to protect a woman's mental health they are doing so on the basis of a false belief not supported by the medical evidence.
"In other words the vast majority of abortions in this country are technically illegal."
Public Health Minister Anne Milton said: "We are pleased to see the conclusions of this important review.
"The findings will be one of the many sources of information that we will use to inform our sexual health document that will be published next year.
"What is clear is that having an unwanted pregnancy has implications for people's mental health and wellbeing."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)