Protection of Conscience Project Library
Service, not Servitude
Extract
Remember the many thousands who have served and are serving honorably, caring for American soldiers and Iraqis, and not the few who might have greatly disappointed us with their lack of proper ethical judgment.
Kiley KC. (Correspondence) Military medicine and human rights. The Lancet. 2004 Nov 20;364(9448):1851-1852.
Extract
As neither our original Commentary on access to emergency contraception nor our letter response was suitable for fully referenced legal or ethical reasoning, we appreciate this opportunity to expand a little on the substance of both, addressing the points Mr Murphy raises.
Dickens BM, Cook RJ. (Correspondence) In Response. 2004 Aug; 26(8): 706-707.
Extract
In a letter in the February issue of JOGC, Rebecca J. Cook and Bernard M. Dickens state, “Physicians who feel entitled to subordinate their patient’s desire for well-being to the service of their own personal morality or conscience should not practise clinical medicine” (emphasis added).
The statement is unsupported by their own legal references, and it has little to recommend it as an ordering principle in the practice of medicine.
Murphy S. (Correspondence) Access to Emergency Contraception. JOGC. 2004 Aug; 26(8): 705-706.
Extract
The CMA Code of Ethics begins with the principle that an ethical physician will consider first the well-being of the patient. Physicians who feel entitled to subordinate their patients’ desire for well-being to the service of their own personal morality or conscience should not practise clinical medicine.
Cook RJ, Dickens BM. (Correspondence) Access to Emergency Contraception – In Response. J. Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2004 Feb;112.
Extract
Not only is the article by David Reardon and associates1 flawed . . . but the authors, particularly the lead author, have a specific and known political bias against abortion rights. . . By publishing an article that does not adhere to high standards, we feel that CMAJ has done a disservice to our field, not to mention women and their families across the nation.
Capperauld L. (Correspondence) Abortion perils debated. Can Med Assoc J. 2003 Jul 22;169(2):101.
Extract
In publishing the abortion opinions(not facts) of David Reardon and associates,1 you have damaged the credibility and reputation of your journal.
Sevier-Fries D. (Correspondence) Abortion perils debated. Can Med Assoc J. 2003 Jul 22;169(2):101.
Extract
. . . the most relevant comparison was not performed. Reardon and associates compared women who delivered babies with women who had abortions. . . it might be more appropriate to ask about the differences between women who undergo abortion and those who want to have an abortion but choose not to because of external pressures or guilt. In such a study, it might be found that abortion was in fact a relatively healthy psychological event.
Keshen A. (Correspondence) Abortion perils debated. Can Med Assoc J. 2003 Jul 22;169(2):102.
Extract
I would like to point out that other prominent medical journals have published research reports on harmful effects associated with abortion. . . . It would appear that the study by Reardon and associates published recently in CMAJ is not the first to present empirical evidence that abortion is a severe risk factor for substantial emotional and physical trauma.
Banno AD. (Correspondence) Abortion perils debated. Can Med Assoc J. 2003;169(2):101-102.
Extract
Having read the well-written article by Laura Eggertson, I feel that her thrust (and that of Planned Parenthood, the Canadian Abortion Rights Action League, Health Minister Allan Rock, etc.) is that it is a scandal and surprise that a “medically necessary” operation — abortion — is not universally accepted like other procedures You do not hear most of the old debating arguments about abortion any more, but the one that will not go away concerns whether abortion is a medically necessary operation. . . .Abortion is both a moral and a medical issue, and we should not be surprised if people do not regard it as a necessary procedure in the same way they view other operations.
Coffey PG. (Correspondence) The abortion issue. Can Med Assoc J. 2001 Jul 10;165(1):14-15.
Extract
Your homey analogy of abortion as a patchwork quilt — a warm, comforting and maternal object if ever there was one — furthers the dishonourable tradition of euphemizing the medicalized killing of small human beings. . . CMA members remain deeply divided on these issues. An even-handed editorial and reporting style would show respect for this diversity of opinion.
Johnston W. (Correspondence) The abortion issue. Can Med Assoc J. 2001 Jul 10;165(1):15.