Two Catholic midwives have today won a landmark court battle for the right to refuse any involvement in abortion procedures.
Mary Doogan, 58, and Connie Wood, 52, argued that being required to supervise staff involved in abortions was a violation of their human rights.
As conscientious objectors, the women had no direct role in pregnancy terminations, but claimed they should also be able to refuse to support staff taking part in the procedures.
Victory: Midwives Connie Wood, left, and Mary Doogan, right, won their right not to have any involvement with abortions at the Court of Session in Edinburgh today
The women took their case against NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde to the Court of Session in Edinburgh but lost last year.
More...
Woman, 26, who was 'too young' to be given a smear test dies from cervical cancer
Bride-to-be 'obsessed' with the colour of her skin died after injecting banned tanning drug
Stafford Hospital bosses could face criminal charges over misconduct
But three appeal judges at the same court today ruled that their appeal should succeed.
'In our view the right of conscientious objection extends not only to the actual medical or surgical termination but to the whole process of treatment given for that purpose,' ruled Lady Dorrian, sitting with Lords Mackay and McEwan.
The health board noted the decision and said it would be considering its options with its legal advisers.
Ms Doogan and Ms Wood were employed as labour ward co-ordinators at the Southern General Hospital in Glasgow.
At the time of the original ruling, Ms Doogan had been absent from work due to ill health since March 2010 and Ms Wood had been transferred to other work.
Both women, practising Roman Catholics, registered their conscientious objection to participation in pregnancy terminations years ago, as allowed by the Abortion Act, but became concerned when all medical terminations were moved to the labour ward in 2007.
They argued that before that they were not called on to delegate, supervise or support staff treating or caring for patients undergoing termination procedures - a stance disputed by the health board.
They said the supervision and support of staff providing care to women having an abortion did amount to 'participation in treatment' and breached their rights under the European Convention on Human Rights. They raised a petition for a judicial review at the court, which was refused last year by judge Lady Smith.
She found that the women were sufficiently removed from involvement in pregnancy terminations to afford them appropriate respect for their beliefs.
The women were working at Southern General Hospital when medical termination were moved to their ward in 2007
The midwives said at the time that they were 'very disappointed' by the decision, and appealed against that ruling.
During the hearing earlier this year, Gerry Moynihan QC, representing the women, suggested that their consciences should determine what tasks they undertake.
He told the court: 'The dividing line ought to be the individual’s conscience, not a bureaucrat saying what is within the literal meaning of the word ‘participation’ or not.'
The health board argued that the right of conscientious objection was a right only to refuse to take part in activities that directly brought about the termination of a pregnancy, and was not available to the pair in respect of their duties of delegation, supervision and support.
NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde said in a statement: 'We note the outcome of the appeal and will be considering our options with our legal advisers over the next few days.'
The midwives’ appeal was supported by the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC), which welcomed today’s decision.
The judges at the Court of Session in Edinburgh (pictured) today ruled in favour of Mary Doogan and Connie Wood
In a statement released by the society, Ms Wood and Ms Doogan said: 'Connie and I are absolutely delighted with today’s judgment from the Court of Session, which recognises and upholds our rights as labour ward midwifery sisters to withdraw from participating in any treatment that would result in medical termination of pregnancy.
'In holding all life to be sacred from conception to natural death, as midwives we have always worked in the knowledge we have two lives to care for throughout labour; a mother and that of her unborn child.
'Today’s judgment is a welcome affirmation of the rights of all midwives to withdraw from a practice that would violate their conscience and which over time, would indeed debar many from entering what has always been a very rewarding and noble profession. It is with great relief we can now return to considerations that are all to do with childbirth and midwifery practice and less to do with legal matters.'
The midwives also thanked 'the many individuals the length and breadth of Britain and, indeed, further afield' who have supported them throughout the dispute.