Hospital bars foetus photos man
UK Life League protest
The UK Life League campaigns against abortion
A 75-year-old man has been denied hip treatment after health officials warned him about sending hospital staff pictures of aborted foetuses.

Anti-abortion supporter Edward Atkinson has been jailed for 28 days for sending offensive photos to the Queen Elizabeth Hospital, King's Lynn, Norfolk.

The hospital said Atkinson had been banned from treatment for anything other than life-threatening conditions.

An anti-abortion group backing Atkinson said the decision was "outrageous".

James Dowson, national co-ordinator of the UK Life League, said: "It is ridiculous. I think it is completely unfair. They are refusing to treat him. Would they refuse a murderer or a paedophile?"

'Zero Tolerance' policy

Atkinson, of Ely Road, Hilgay, Norfolk, had been on a waiting list for an assessment for a hip operation when he started sending in pictures of aborted foetuses.

The NHS Trust wrote to him asking him not to send such material to the hospital as it was distressing staff.

When he continued, the trust said he had broken its "zero tolerance" policy with regards to staff.

On Monday, Ruth May, chief executive of the Queen Elizabeth Hospital, said in a statement: "The trust's view is that we have a duty of care to our staff.

Queen Elizabeth Hospital, King's Lynn
Atkinson sent the photos to the Queen Elizabeth Hospital

"Our legal advisers were consulted and their opinion was that this man's actions contravened the NHS Zero Tolerance policy in cases of abuse or unacceptable behaviour towards our staff.

"We take such matters extremely seriously and because he continued to send extremely graphic material to us we exercised our right to decline treatment to him for anything other than life-threatening conditions."

On Thursday at Swaffham Magistrates Court, Atkinson was convicted of three counts of sending offensive literature or material to staff at the hospital between January and April this year.

The literature, sent via the post, contained colour images of a dead foetus and the video, hand delivered, was of an abortion.

- all i can say is powned!

(from http://www.bbc.co.uk I am sorry if this offended anyone who is Pro-life, myself im pro-choice so yes.. pwnd)

Sometimes I wonder what possesses people to act the way they do.

I see it as just the same as him sending in lude pictures of his own certain body parts.

Basically the same charge. Just different images. And I think the Hospitial has the right.

I for one agree with the hospital... ban his butt... regardless of what he was sending.. nudes, aborted fetuses or what not.. that is just crossing aline between being pro-life and being a fanatical lunatic...

Dont get me wrong, I back the hospital 100%. It definitely follows as abuse.

BUT, let me paint you a picture.

This guy gets hit by a car (hooray!) and then ends up at this hospital for treatment. Now the hospital is going to be under a microscope and at huge risk for legal issues.

Like I said, I understand and support the decision, but it certainly has potential for harm to the facility.

I do see where your coming from Kettle and I agree the hospital is slowly putting themselves into a corner.

I don't see how they are endangering themselves. Explain?

The hospital said they would treat him in case of life threatening injuries. So if he got hit by a car, had a heart attack, whatever accidental thing, they would treat him. They are refusing him treatment for such things as elective surgeries, and pre-planned ones like that hip replacement. How does that put the hospital at risk? It isn't like they are going to let him sit on the sidewalk and die.

Well lets say he was injured badly, and went to the hospital.
If someone botched the operation, or if they couldn't save his leg or something, he could claim that they didn't do everything in their power to help him because of what he did and this could be substaciated by the fact they denied him his other operation.

Wow... what the heck is wrong with some people. Why would....

ugh...

I wont get into it.

Exactly.

Medico-legal stuff is very touch and go. Because no matter wht a doctor does for you, there is another way to do it and all that a skilled lawyer has to do is make a jury (with no medical backround, mind you) believe that trying the other way MAY have worked out better...