(Correspondence) CMA policy on abortion

CMAJ

Canadian Medical Association Journal, CMAJ
Canadian Medical Association Journal

Extract
While the CMA has recommended the removal of the requirement for hospital therapeutic abortion committees from the Criminal Code, it has supported the retention of the balance of sections 251 and 252. The purpose of this stand is to retain the more serious implications of a violation of the Criminal Code as compared with a violation of provincial medical acts regarding the performance of abortions by non-qualified persons or by qualified physicians outside approved hospitals. This policy also reflects the association’s opinion that some provincial medical acts, and the means of enforcing them, are less than adequate.


CMAJ. (Correspondence) CMA policy on abortion. Can Med Assoc J. 1974 Nov 02;111(9):905.

(News) CFPC discusses changing world of the family physician

David Woods

Canadian Medical Association Journal, CMAJ
Canadian Medical Association Journal

Extract
Dr. Doran said that there are now 12 centres in Canada where genetic amniocentesis is performed, including his own group in Toronto which has done 195 in less than three years. The overall goal of the technique, he said, is to reduce genetic disease by therapeutic abortion (technically illegal under the present Criminal Code) and eventually by prevention.


Woods D. CFPC discusses changing world of the family physician. Can Med Assoc J. 1974 Oct 05;111(7):717-719.

Abortion and Conscience Clause: Current Status

Dennis J Horan

The Catholic Lawyer
The Catholic Lawyer

Abstract
The abortion controversy is currently in the coercive stage. The hard core proponents of legalized abortion are now busy opposing abortion legislation that keeps abortion in the criminal code, or that seeks to regulate abortion other than through the medical practice act. Their aim is the psychological satisfaction of making abortion not only legal, but morally acceptable to all but the cranky Catholics. Part of the plan includes opposition of conscience clauses. Obviously this latter stance smacks of a betrayal of their promise that their wish was only freedom now, and thus they are somewhat at a disadvantage before the courts, at least as far as the conscience clause is concerned.


Horan DJ. Abortion and Conscience Clause: Current Status. Catholic Lawyer. 1974;20(4):289-302.

Constitutional Law: Private Hospital May Refuse to Perform Abortion

Betty Berger

Saint Louis University Law Journal
Saint Louis University Law Journal

Extract
Conclusion

It is evident that the abortion question in relation to private hospitals is being fought on two grounds. One ground is state action. The other is freedom of religion and moral conviction. Decisions are beginning to indicate that public hospitals may have to perform abortions if they have the facilities. On the other hand, decisions such as Bellin, indicate that courts may not find sufficient state action when a private hospital is involved even if that hospital has received public funds. Even if they do, Bellin indicates that the right of conscience may protect the private hospital which is also sectarian and opposed to abortion on religious and moral grounds.’ Furthermore, the United States Congress has established a policy that receipt of funds from Hill-Burton or any other programs covered by the Health Services Extension Act of 1973 should not force a hospital to provide personnel and facilities for abortions. In addition, the first amendment protects the rights of individuals and groups to refuse to do what their religion prohibits. Abortions are generally a convenience and not a matter of life and death if not performed in the private hospital. In the balance of convenience versus first amendment freedoms, courts are unlikely to let convenience prevail. Private hospitals have sold neither their rights nor their private status..


Berger B. Constitutional Law: Private Hospital May Refuse to Perform Abortion. Saint Louis U Law J. 1974;18(3): 440-460.

(Correspondence) Inquiry into British law on abortion

PE Shea

Extract
Alan Massam’s article “Abortion Act gains outweigh drawbacks – British inquiry” (Can Med Assoc J 110: 1301, 1974) is a disturbing example of slanted journalism, aimed at further poisoning the minds of the bulk of doctors who sit on the fence in the abortion issue. . . .Mr. Massam, and apparently the inquiry, attempt to subtly convince us that abortion is a socially, morally, legally acceptable fact of life and we need only concern ourselves with its details. . . . Surely all our human rights are secondary to the right to life. This is the basic principle that the inquiry and Mr. Massam choose to ignore.


Shea P. (Correspondence) Inquiry into British law on abortion. Can Med Assoc J. 1974 Sep 7;111(5):388.

(Points from Letters) Attitudes to Abortion

TJ Hypher

British Medical Journal, BMJ
British Medical Journal

Extract
. . . I would submit that those who have the courage to stand by their convictions against substantial pressures will be among our most highly principled colleagues. We cannot afford to be without them, and indeed they and both our profession and our patients require that you give them your strongest support. You may not agree with their opinions, but if you do not champion their principles then we shall be in a sorry plight when each subsequent wave of emotion effects an Act in some kindred field.


Hypher TJ. (Points from Letters) Attitudes to Abortion. Br Med J. 1974 May 25;2(5916):448.

(Correspondence) Attitudes to Abortion

GS Banwell

British Medical Journal, BMJ
British Medical Journal

Extract
The right to conscientious objection is embodied in the Abortion Act, and the Lane Committee has not suggested that this section should be amended. It is difficult to understand why you advocate that a consultant gynaecologist, alone among surgical specialists, should be compelled to perform a particular operation other than on the basis of his own judgement. The right to conscientious objection to the performance of therapeutic abortion continues to be the law of the land. . . But it must remain the duty of the medical profession to protest that therapeutic abortion involves the destruction of human life.


Banwell G. (Correspondence) Attitudes to Abortion. Br Med J. 1974;2(5915):383. Available from:

(Editorial) Attitudes to Abortion

British Medical Journal

British Medical Journal, BMJ
British Medical Journal

Extract
Abortion for a wide range of indications is, however, now an established part of conventional medical practice in Britain and the committee seemed a little impatient with those who would not recognize that fact. A conscience clause was manifestly essential when the Act came in, since many gynaecologists had sincere moral or ethical objections to abortion on some of the grounds introduced by the new Act. Seven years later the situation has changed. As the committee points out,the number and attitude of gynaecologists are important in determining the level of service which can be provided, so that “it is inevitable that the health authorities should prefer for appointment to certain posts those who see abortion as properly part of clinical gynaecological practice.” What this implies is that a young doctor may find some difficulty in taking up a career in gynaecology in the N.H.S. if he is fundamentally opposed on ethical grounds to abortion in the terms of the Act.


BMJ. (Editorial) Attitudes to Abortion. Br Med J. 1974;2(5910):69-70.

(Correspondence) Obstetric Appointments and the Abortion Act

Conor J Carr

British Medical Journal, BMJ
British Medical Journal

Extract
I am afraid, therefore, that the potential trainee with a conscientious objection to abortion must face the fact that even if he is fortunate enough to obtain trainee posts in units where his conscience can be respected, he will still have to face the fact at the end of his training, that if he does not obtain a post in a large teaching unit, he is likely to have to face the choice of either leaving the specialty or the country.


Carr CJ. (Correspondence) Obstetric Appointments and the Abortion Act. Br Med J. 1971 Jul 31;3(5769):305.