Skip to comments.Paediatrician to be Removed from Adoption Panel...(for not supporting gay adoption as "best option")
Posted on 07/27/2009 8:19:42 PM PDT by Maelstorm
A COMMUNITY paediatrician, with 18 years experience working with parents and children in Northamptonshire, is to be removed as a medical advisor to Northamptonshire County Council after asking to be able to abstain from voting on the 'rare' occasions when she would be asked to recommend children for adoption by same-sex couples.
Dr Sheila Matthews, who has been a medical advisor to the Adoption Panel for five years, believes her work is appreciated by social workers and all those involved with adoption in the county. She says: "I try to make fair and unbiased assessments and recommendations about the individuals who apply to adopt. My work involves preparing reports on the health of both children and adult applicants and giving advice on health issues to the Adoption Service. I am happy to carry out that role in full."
However, as a professional doctor for the past 28 years, and as a Christian, she believes that it is "inappropriate to place children in a household with same sex parents as the best option". She says: "Using my professional judgement and having done a lot of reading around the subject, I am satisfied that there are research findings which support my position that a same sex partnership is not the best family setting to bring up children. Therefore professionally and personally I cannot recommend placement in a same-sex household to be in the best interest of a child, despite what politicians may have legislated for, and as those on the Panel have a legal obligation to do what they believe is in the best interests of the child, then I cannot support a recommendation with which I do not agree. This conflicts with my professional, religious and personal integrity.
Dr Matthews decided that it was not appropriate to debate the broader religious, psychological and political issues of same sex adoption within the context of each individual application. She also does not wish to cause offence to any individual. She therefore sought what she thought to be a reasonable and appropriate compromise, and requested that in applications by same sex couples, she should to be allowed to abstain from voting (i.e. not vote yes or no ) on the recommendation. She was prepared to carry out all preparation of health reports required for Panel in an unbiased manner.
There would still be a majority vote at Panel so this would not hinder the rest of the Panel making a recommendation and the decision to approve applicants lies ultimately with a senior member of Social Services. The Head of Services for Children, Young People and Families, Martin Pratt, after a meeting on April 22, wrote to Dr Matthews advising she could no longer continue in her role as a panel member and that another medical advisor should be identified. Dr Matthews, from Kettering, has asked for advice and support from the high-profile Christian Legal Centre, which has instructed leading Human Rights barrister, Paul Diamond, to represent Dr Matthews.
Andrea Minichiello Williams, barrister and director of the CLC said: "This is a further example of how a well respected professional who holds conscientious views on sexual practice, informed by Christian faith, is being asked to choose between her faith and her job. Recent anti-discrimination legislation is having the opposite effect and devout Christians are suffering the consequences. This is not the mark of a free and civilised society where freedom of speech and religion is carefully guarded.'
Dr Matthew's professional concerns informed by her faith and scientific evidence about the 'best interests' of placing children in 'same-sex' households are upheld by Dr Dean Byrd, an international expert from the USA who gave evidence in the case of the Family Magistrate Andrew McClintock who had similar concerns to Dr Matthews about placing children into same sex households. Unless the matter is resolved Dr Dean Byrd will be called to give evidence on Dr Matthews' behalf. He will say that the current adoption procedures in the UK are 'social experiments' at best, and at the risk of children's emotional and psychological well-being, in order to be politically correct. Dr Matthews' professional conclusions are in the 'best interests of children'.
Dr. Dean Byrd, an academic, practitioner and President of NARTH (Highland, Utah). In a recent UK Employment Tribunal case, he appealed against UK Governmental research; Dr Byrd has conducted three decades of research on optimal development of children, and claimed UK Government research to be an unbalanced view. Fathers and Mothers are not inter-changeable. Gender matters for children. His world-wide research concludes that children in same sex unions have outcomes as poor as those of fractured heterosexual families; placing an 'at risk' child in a further 'at risk' situation makes the situation worse. The current UK adoption policy reinforces poor outcomes and promotes poor lifestyles.
She has been re-instated but can not vote on the panel:
Some good links:
Bullsh**. I think your tagline says it all.
See that is how the left works. They make it so only their opinions are valid and carry any weight.
Tell us more.
I admire this woman! when others, even large organizations, just stand on the side in silence! (get it?)
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.
Obama Says A Baby Is A Punishment
Britain continuing to prove that the abyss has no bottom.
LIBERALISM IS THE WORST TYPE OF CANCER.
Please FreepMail me if you want on or off my Pro-Life Ping List.
No degree of moral depravity in the UK surprises me anymore.
Do you think this does not occur here in the US? Just because it is not a story here does not mean it doesn’t happen. Our press is not nearly as open with such things. Hell a Gay Aids researcher at Duke University can adopt and molest two little black boys and barely a peep. It shows how very corrupt not just the left but also the right is.
Too bad it isn't incurable and fatal for those who believe in it.
Moral insanity is dictatorial and allows no competition, those under it’s sway do destroy all those who would stand against it.
Viz Dr Sheila Matthews, viz Sarah Palin.
I don't disagree with you; I just think the UK is a (very) few steps ahead of us in the depravity department.
When the Archbishop of Canterbury can't read the plain text of the Bible and say "no" to the decadent gay Americans, avoiding a schism, it's all weenies, all the time. Monty Python was more true-to-life than it was satire. Never trust a man in a dress.
From Code of Coercion by George Will, Washington Post, October 14, 2007:
"In 2005, Emily Brooker, a social-work student at Missouri State University, was enrolled in a class taught by a professor who advertised himself as a liberal and insisted that social work is a liberal profession. At first, a mandatory assignment for his class was to advocate homosexual foster homes and adoption, with all students required to sign an advocacy letter, on university stationery, to the state legislature.
"When Brooker objected on religious grounds, the project was made optional. But shortly before the final exam she was charged with a "Level 3," the most serious, violation of professional standards. In a 2 1/2 -hour hearing -- which she was forbidden to record and which her parents were barred from attending -- the primary subject was her refusal to sign the letter. She was ordered to write a paper ("Written Response about My Awareness") explaining how she could "lessen the gap" between her ethics and those of the social-work profession. When she sued the university, it dropped the charges and made financial and other restitution.
"The NAS study says that at Rhode Island College's School of Social Work, a conservative student, William Felkner, received a failing grade in a course requiring students to lobby the state legislature for a cause mandated by the department. The NAS study also reports that Sandra Fuiten abandoned her pursuit of a social-work degree at the University of Illinois at Springfield after the professor, in a course that required students to lobby the legislature on behalf of positions prescribed by the professor, told her that it is impossible to be both a social worker and an opponent of abortion.
"In the month since the NAS released its study, none of the schools covered by it has contested its findings. Because there might as well be signs on the doors of many schools of social work proclaiming "conservatives need not apply," two questions arise: Why are such schools of indoctrination permitted in institutions of higher education? And why are people of all political persuasions taxed to finance this propaganda?"
Thanks for the post. People just don’t understand what is going on while they are not watching.