Abortion Archives - Page 24 of 50 - Protection of Conscience Project Library

(Correspondence) Eugenic abortion: an ethical critique

Malcolm N Beck

Canadian Medical Association Journal, CMAJ — Canadian Medical Association Journal

Extract
I wished to avoid discussion of abortion in unplanned and unwanted pregnancies in order to bring some sharpness of focus to my paper. The conclusion that I favour early abortion for trivial reasons is decidedly mistaken. . . . I agree with Welch that not advising patients about amniocentesis renders physicians culpable in law. This is, as my paper suggests, a highly undesirable but predictable result of genetic abortion. I therefore strongly urge all physicians and the CMA to rescind their approval of these destructive procedures, which have nothing whatsoever to do with the traditional role of medicine. . . I sincerely hope, however, that we never accept the philosophic position that “there are no right and wrong decisions.” To do so would be to disassociate ourselves from the historical, philosophic and moral stance of our profession. . . . The practice of selective feticide involves the destruction (one could more accurately say murder) of the fetus to assuage the distressed and anguished response of the mother and father (and society) to the birth of a handicapped child. If this is not a eugenic procedure, then the word has lost all meaning. . . .

Beck MN. (Correspondence) Eugenic abortion: an ethical critique. Can Med Assoc J. 1991;144(1):12-13.

Justice minister tries to allay doctors’ fears about abortion bill

Patrick Sullivan

Extract
In a letter to Edulaw, a Calgary-based medicolegal newsletter, Kim Campbell says physicians have nothing to fear from Bill C-43, the federal abortion legislation that is currently before the Senate. . . In her letter to Edulaw, Campbell says “certain persons” opposed to the legislation are distorting its contents and potential impact in order to “cause fear on the part of medical practitioners”. She maintains that there are adequate safeguards in both the civil and criminal law “to prevent frivolous and malicious proceedings being brought against doctors”. . . In forming an opinion, says Campbell, physicians will be able to consider “such factors as rape, incest, genetic defects and socio-economic factors”.

Sullivan P. Justice minister tries to allay doctors’ fears about abortion bill. Can Med Assoc J. 1990;143(12):1220.

(Correspondence) The fetus as a person

Patrick G Coffey

Extract
Some people, however, would argue that an early human being does not become a “person” till sometime after birth, and others would argue that this time has arrived when fetal brain waves are recordable (about 6 weeks). Obviously, any point along the way, including the 23-week mark, is arbitrary and depends on each person’s perspective. . . surely it is not just or scientific to choose some arbitrary time.

Coffey PG. (Correspondence) The fetus as a person. Can Med Assoc J. 1990 Dec 01;143(11):1156.

(Correspondence) Abortion and the DPG ratio

(Dr. Bart responds)

John Bart

Extract
“You’re an interferer, not an adviser; like the rest of your ingenuous ilk.” . . . “You have no humility. You underestimate your patients. You assume they don’t know anything, that they just react to circumstances.”. . . He shook his neck and preened his feathers as he delivered the coup de grace. “Let me tell you: that’s what you do because you don’t like what they’re up to.” . . . “Give ’em credit for being able to run their own affairs, you paternalistic autocrat!” . . . “We live in a social democracy now” . . . “Stick to medicine (it’s hard enough for you to get that right). Leave morals for moralists. Too many cooks have spoiled that broth already.”

Bart J. (Correspondence) Abortion and the DPG ratio (Dr. Bart responds). Can Med Assoc J. 1990;143(9):832.

(Correspondence) Abortion and the DPG ratio

Gillian Arsenault

Extract
He explains that advising a patient how to proceed morally (as in the matter of abortion) is playing God. . . Instead, we should refuse to play God: we should let the patient make her own decision and take the responsibility for herself. I cannot agree with Bart, at least not as far as Christian god- lore goes. As I recall, God gave man free choice, so that he could make his own decisions and take the responsibility for himself. Therefore, if we doctors do not wish to play God, we should be advising our patients how to proceed. In fact, we normally do advise our patients how to proceed,whether there be one suitable option or many. We also advise strongly against unsuitable options. Indeed, if a patient informs us that she intends to inflict bodily harm on anyone, we not only advise her not to do it but may even commit her to keep her from doing it. The sad exception, of course, is when a patient informs us that she intends to inflict bodily harm on her own baby in utero. In this case Bart would have it that we should dispassionately accept the patient’s decision. If killing on request isn’t playing God, then what is?

Arsenault G. (Correspondence) Abortion and the DPG ratio. Can Med Assoc J. 1990;143(9):829-832.

(Correspondence) Abortion and the DPG ratio

(Dr. Bart responds)

John Bart

Extract
These two letters, one so clear, the other so impassioned, seem to have the right of it; so too do the arguments of their opponents when I read them. Therein lies the rub: everyone is right, according to his lights. The question for the rest of us is, How bright are these lights? I for one do not know. . . .”In a world where everyone is right, nothing is left but personal responsibility. That will take you down the straight and narrow road to whatever you and yours deserve. That is the true meaning of PR. I wish we all did just that, good PR, instead of living each others’ lives, which is where all the trouble comes from.” . . . “You mind your business, I’ll mind mine; then everyone will have an easier time.”.

Bart J. (Correspondence) Abortion and the DPG ratio (Dr. Bart responds). Can Med Assoc J. 1991;143(3):277.

(Correspondence) CMA’s Code of Ethics

Robert H Brown

Summary
Writer asks Canadian Medical Association to clarify if prohibition of abortion in Hippocratic Oath is considered invalid by the CMA.

Brown RH. (Correspondence) CMA’s Code of Ethics. Can Med Assoc J. 1990;143(2):88.

(Correspondence) CMA’s Code of Ethics

Eike-Henner Kluge (Canadian Medical Association)

Extract
(Quotes preamble to Hippocratic Oath) Whoever takes this oath swears to use his or her judgement in following the clauses that form the body of the oath. Therefore, if in the best judgement of a physician it is medically appropriate to perform an abortion, then this oath allows the physician to perform the abortion. In fact, given the whole tenor and thrust of the oath, it could even be argued that in such a case the oath enjoins the physician to perform an abortion as a matter of conscientious and professional medical practice. . .there is no contradiction between saying that the CMA’s Code of Ethics retains the principles in the oath and saying that the CMA’s policy on abortion is in keeping with its Code of Ethics.

Kluge E-H. (Correspondence) CMA’s Code of Ethics. Can Med Assoc J. 1990 Jul 15;143(2):88-89.

(Correspondence) Abortion as mayhem

R H Boardman

Extract
The criminalization of abortion in Britain stemmed from the crime of mayhem. Any act that left the victim less able to serve the monarch was mayhem. . . Abortion might deprive the monarch of a future British soldier, so it was considered mayhem. Its criminalization had little to do with the sanctity of life.

Boardman RH. (Correspondence) Abortion as mayhem. Can Med Assoc J. 1990;142(11):1183.

Hospital’s decision to pursue fetal transplantation upsets antiabortionists

Deborah Jones

Extract
Canada’s first research project involving the transplantation of tissue from aborted fetuses into patients with Parkinson’s disease is an issue entirely separate from abortion, the researchers say. However . . . The fetal transplant procedure creates enormous ethical dilemmas for many. Critics state that any use of abortion-related material is wrong because abortion itself is wrong. Some also charge that fetal transplantation will inevitably lead to the “harvesting” of fetuses and make some women “fetus factories”. . . .However, supporters of fetal transplantation state that abortion is an entirely separate issue . . . “We’re simply using the products of women, who have chosen abortion, for research purposes”, said Kathy Coffin of the Canadian Abortion Rights Action League. . . .

Jones D. Hospital’s decision to pursue fetal transplantation upsets antiabortionists. Can Med Assoc J. 1990 Jun 01;142(11):1277.