Reflections on the RCOG World Congress 2019, London, UK, 17–19 June 2019

15 July 2019

I am not an obvious person to be invited to attend the World Congress of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. For one thing, I’m neither an obstetrician nor a gynaecologist. I’m not even a doctor. But I do feel passionately about reproductive rights, which has led me to sit as the Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) Representative on the British Society of Abortion Care Providers (BSACP) Council, and it was in that role I was invited to attend the Congress. For the first time, each ‘stream’ of conference presentations began with a brief presentation by a patient representative, introducing the lived experience of the service user of that area of medicine.

I was fortunate enough to be able to talk to patients, abortion providers, academics who research reproductive health, and campaigning groups. I heard so many stories, of good and bad experiences and, most strikingly, of women who are robbed of their autonomy over their bodies and forced to continue unwanted and sometimes unsafe pregnancies by law and insufficient provision. Condensing all I heard into a 5-minute presentation [see separate blog] was a challenge, but the common theme was the chilling effect that the continuing criminalisation of abortion has across the UK, restricting doctors from performing a medical service and pregnant women from making the best choice for their particular circumstances. Of course, for women in Northern Ireland the effect is greatest, because the exceptions permitting abortion in the 1967 Abortion Act do not apply there, and only if there will be a grave or fatal outcome to the pregnancy is abortion permitted.

The presentations in the ‘abortion stream’, organised by the BSACP, were all guided by the broader theme of ‘listening to women’. Professor Sharon Cameron introduced new research from Europe and the USA on advances in early medical abortion, working on ways to minimise the disruption of medical abortion to the lives of women seeking early abortion. Laura MacIsaac continued on a similar theme in her presentation on cervical priming prior to abortion, minimising the number of clinic visits and discomfort for women while ensuring safety. Finally, Professor Emily Jackson offered a legal perspective on decriminalisation of abortion, explaining what legislative change is needed and suggesting what strategies would bring about that change.

The ‘stream’ then continued with abstract presentations that introduced new trials and international developments in abortion care.

The conference room quickly filled up so that it was standing room only, with over 100 attendees present from around the world. Such was the demand that the presentations were streamed via video link to an adjoining room for those unable to find space in the main room.

In the afternoon I was able to attend sessions on other aspects of gynaecology. Although I was afraid of feeling like a non-medical ‘muggle’, I found that the presentations by the British Society of Paediatric and Adolescent Gynaecology overlapped both with issues of consent in abortion but also with my research, as a PhD student in law and sociology, specialising in children’s rights. Everywhere I was struck by the friendliness and openness of the obstetrics and gynaecology doctors I met, and the commitment to exploring perspectives on obstetrics and gynaecology outside the medical.

Thanks to the Royal College of Obstetricians & Gynaecologists (RCOG) Women’s Voices Involvement Panel who organised the patient representative presentations and BSACP for inviting me. Thanks above all to everyone who shared their stories and the stories of the women on whose behalf they were campaigning.

Charlotte Kelly, Patient and Public Involvement Representative on BSACP Council