Christian mental health worker Margaret Forrester reinstated and promoted
Well, this is an unusally happy ending.
Margaret Forester passed the booklet to family planning staff at the health centre where she works because she felt that the NHS was not offering patients enough information about the risks associated with terminating a pregnancy.
But Ms Forester, 39, said she was suspended from her job as a psychological wellbeing practitioner based in Westminster because managers at Central North West London Mental Health Trust disagreed with her personal beliefs.
It would appear that not only has she been reinstated, but also offered a better job:
She was today offered a better position in a different location to her previous job in Westminster following the intervention of the Christian Legal Centre. She has accepted the position.
Ms Forrester said she was “pleased” with the outcome, saying it was a “victory for freedom of speech”.
Don’t often see a resolution as positive as this. Make the most of it.
Tags: Christianity, News
January 27th, 2011 at 5:00 pm
This is good news. A prayer of thanks would seem appropriate!
January 27th, 2011 at 5:10 pm
Indeed Roger. And because it is good news, hardly anyone will comment.
January 27th, 2011 at 5:21 pm
Excellent news.
January 27th, 2011 at 5:35 pm
It is wonderful news that they finally saw sense!!!
As a practitioner, it is paramount to offer sound information – pros and cons of procedures – to enable a patient/client to make an informed decision.
January 27th, 2011 at 5:35 pm
Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit.
As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, world without end.
Amen.
January 27th, 2011 at 6:01 pm
It is good news. This was an appalling thing to have happened. This is the reason why the CLC and the Christian Institute MUST continue to bring these cases. They may be only small fry in the scheme of things, but if the CLC (or another organisation) had not backed Ms Forrester what would have happened? The NHS would have got away with this piece of bullying and been given a free pass to do it again to whoever they chose whose views did not fit with their own. Now they will have to stop and think before doing it again.
Having said all this, I am not sure that booklets containing only stories of women having been damaged by abortion should be handed out willy-nilly. What is happening at present, though, is that women are only being given the positive side of the story (if you can call a dead baby positive), and they are not being warned of the possible adverse consequences – of higher rates of breast cancer and psychological problems, and so forth. So Ms Forrester is quite right to be concerned about this. Women considering abortion must be presented with the minuses as well as the plusses.
Perhaps in her new role she will be able to raise awareness of this in a slightly different way.
However, if I were in her position, I would very likely have done the same!
January 27th, 2011 at 6:10 pm
Although it has to be said that there will be Christians who would have preferred a “martyr” as evidence of persecution.
January 27th, 2011 at 6:35 pm
Gordon,
That is a very sweeping statement, and quite uncalled for.
This particular case is a total senseless intolerance of religious convictions, where in all truth her actions were based on professionalism.
Margaret Forester was exercising ‘gold standard’ care, the whole premise is based in informed decision making. Her advice was also backed by the Royal College of Psychiatrists, who have expressed concern that women do not receive enough information as some will suffer mental illness and depression after the procedure.
January 27th, 2011 at 6:45 pm
Well said, Phoebs. I think Gordon has a profound misunderstanding of the Christian ethos of human life being sacred from conception to natural death. It is not ‘all about us’.
January 27th, 2011 at 6:50 pm
I also think this was the best outcome. While I can’t say I’m wild about pamphlets on this matter that have religious backing, it was circulated internally, not passed on to patients. These issues should at the very least be able to be raised for discussion with colleagues.
January 27th, 2011 at 7:12 pm
Indeed so. Bullies like to blame their victims. Those who persecute rely on the aid of those who try to cover up what is happening.
What times we live in! Why would anyone want to hide these evils, rather than remove them?
January 27th, 2011 at 8:08 pm
Thats a bit of a non sweeping statement Jill.
Note that I made a general statement that there will be some_christians who are disappointed by this because some are looking for evidence of persecution. Thats based on the way that some Christians use these cases as evidence for the “end times”. To them a martyr would be preferable than a happy outcome.
On the other hand you made a statement presuming to know what I personally think, which you don’t.
Mmm.
If only you knew!
January 27th, 2011 at 8:29 pm
Gordon, you know the deep respect I have for you, but I am genuinly delighted at this outcome. Common sense has prevailed.
I for one don’t want evidence of Christian persecution, further, I don’t want evdience of intolerance of variant views, which this case stank of.
January 27th, 2011 at 8:36 pm
Note that I made a general statement that there will be some_christians who are disappointed by this because some are looking for evidence of persecution.
Gordon, this is nonsensical from a Christian perspective!
Even the most hardcore fundamentalists, will see this as a victory, and give the glory to God.
January 27th, 2011 at 8:52 pm
Possibly. Its clearly a good outcome, but you can’t help feeling that there are some people who do revel in persecution.
January 28th, 2011 at 4:08 am
A lot of angry atheists certainly revel in persecution.
January 28th, 2011 at 8:13 am
As an atheist I am not angered by this decision. I don’t have all the facts and so can’t justifiably shout that this was a wrong decision even if I wanted to.
If justice has been done, and seen to be done, then good for all of them, and I am happy for Ms Forrester as an individual that she has come out of this well. My only concern would be if the decision was unsound. perhaps in due course we will see the details of the hearing for ourselves.
January 28th, 2011 at 9:14 am
A very telling comment from Simian.
January 28th, 2011 at 11:35 am
The plea for ‘more information to be made available’ must be good practice. I do not see why snide comments have to be made after a positive outcome.
January 28th, 2011 at 11:48 am
I totally agree TerryB.