LONDON, January 12, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A 39-year-old British Christian mental health worker is facing the sack for expressing her opinions in a private conversation with colleagues about the mental health problems faced by women who have had abortions.How much sense does it make to require a skilled highly-paid professional to sit idly at work, especially, when the nation's finances are in disarray, when taxes are going up and when the government tries to cut back wherever possible?
Forrester told colleagues that she was concerned that women are not being given adequate information on the dangers of abortion to their long-term mental health. She showed co-workers a booklet on post-abortion syndrome that featured the personal testimonies of women who have suffered from it.
After this conversation, Forrester was called into a meeting with her manager and questioned about her views. At first she was suspended from her job, but then the Trust changed her status to a special leave with pay, during which she was required to sit in an office and not work.
On the other hand, what choice do they have? If they don't make an example of Margaret Forrester, if they let healthcare professionals discuss post-abortion syndrome, if women eventually get to know the truth, then the pro-aborts could no longer claim that abortion is harmless; they could no longer refer to their trade as "women's health"; they could no longer request funding for their businesses as part of the government's "maternal health" initiative...
Since the law prevents them from firing Margaret, they're isolating her from her patients. Giving Margaret her paycheck then becomes a small price to pay for the pro-aborts to protect their myths and their blood-tainted money.
Meanwhile, the abortion status-quo faces another threat; this one - in Canada. A provincial court judge has ruled that there is enough merit in a complaint by Linda Gibbons’s defence lawyer of abuse of process:
Greene’s decision means that the rare spectacle of Crown attorneys and other related personnel taking the witness stand to be cross-examined on their roles in the prosecution of Gibbons will take place during the three days in March at the College Park courthouse, Yonge and College Streets in downtown Toronto. That should come as some satisfaction to pro-life activists in southern Ontario, who have long witnessed questionable conduct on the part of Crown prosecutors in their handling of abortion-related cases for over a decade and a half.If even the judges start noticing that the pro-aborts have gone too far in persecuting those who dare to disagree with them, then things don't look good for them. Even if the court doesn't strike down the "bubble zone" injunction, the prosecution will have to tone down their efforts.
Among the things they have seen Crown prosecutors do is consistently lay charges in such a way as to deny Gibbons a jury trial, press for prison sentences at the high end of the spectrum, never call abortion personnel as witnesses so as not to inconvenience them and always lay criminal charges, even though the injunction was decreed in a civil court and should have been pursued there.
The latter issue is now before the Supreme Court for possible consideration, with a decision on whether it will be heard expected by March. Gibbons will mark her second anniversary in prison by then - she has been held continuously behind bars since January 20, 2009 as the judicial processes on a charge of disobeying a court order have played out.