Thanks for your comments.  You asked, "Why single out RCOG"?  That would be because the present article is about RCOG.

You asked, "would you described these as pro-choice advocacy groups"?  Please observe that my edit to this article said that RCOG took a "pro-choice position" about a particular issue.  That is different from saying that RCOG is a "pro-choice advocacy group."  KillerChihuahua pointed out that difference here.

I am not trying to avoid your question about the BMA, though it's not relevant in connection with the present article.  Yes, I would personally view the BMA as a pro-choice advocacy group.  After all, the report to which you refer states that, "the BMA does not start off from a neutral position in this debate....the BMA has repeatedly since the 1970s agreed [sic] policy statements supporting the Abortion Act ... and calling for the legislation to be extended to Northern Ireland."

I admit that it is hypothetically possible that opposition to reducing abortion time limits might be motivated by concerns about late diagnosis of fetal abnormalities.  As you know, such abortions account for a very tiny fractions of abortions, but you're correct that concern about such situations could hypothetically cause someone to block a general reduction in time limits.

However, RCOG has said it is pro-choice, explicitly supporting "rights of women to exercise personal choice."  RCOG has not only opposed reductions in abortion time limits, but has also sought to "make abortions easier and faster."  It therefore would seem very odd to contend that RCOG has never taken any pro-choice positions.