0 - Page 3 of 3 - Protection of Conscience Project Library

(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

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:

(Correspondence) Attitudes to Abortion

JS Scott

Extract
You suggest that while a conscience clause was “manifestly essential” seven years ago, now “the situation has changed.”In what way? The extermination chambers of the Third Reich were no less of an affront to civilization at the end than they were at the beginning of their existence; the few who continued to speak against them were every bit as right ultimately as initially. Lest it be said that this is quite remote from the British abortion situation, I record that I have been faced with a healthy and affluent young woman demanding abortion”because the father is a Jew.” That the abortion was carried out, though not by me, may give some of your readers pause for thought.

Scott J. (Correspondence) Attitudes to Abortion. Br Med J. 1974 May 11;2(5914):329-330.

(Correspondence) Attitudes to Abortion

David M Jenkins

Extract
The reason that doctors, nurses, and patients find abortion “distasteful” has not changed. . . I have little doubt that people who find abortion”distasteful” will now not go into gynaecology. The consequence will be that a specialty never very rich in grey matter will become deficient in character as well. And who will suffer? Your implication that we gynaecologists are unsympathetic to our patients is just untrue. Neither are we susceptible to the temptations of courting easy popularity.

Jenkins DM. (Correspondence) Attitudes to Abortion. Br Med J. 1974 May 11;2(5914):330. Available from:

(Editorial) Attitudes to Abortion

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) Abortion and the pregnant teenager

EH Curran

Canadian Medical Association Journal, CMAJ — Canadian Medical Association Journal

Extract
The fact remains that, however technically safe and socially acceptable induced abortion becomes, it is a destructive procedure with some onerous implications. . . We even tolerate the ridiculous and completely unsupportable notion that a fetus is parasitic until 20 weeks and somehow human after that time. It is my hope that we shall reconsider our age-old pledge to preserve life and relieve pain and not sell out to the madness of social expediency.

Curran E. (Correspondence) Abortion and the pregnant teenager. Can Med Assoc J. 1974 Feb 02;110(3):261.

(Correspondence) Abortion

Wena VP Williams

Extract
In the 20th century it is unrealistic to teach children that babies are made through acts of sexual intercourse and not to teach them when they become adolescents how to make love without making an unwanted baby. . . Contraceptives should be easily available to every boy and girl who is sexually active and responsible enough to admit it by seeking birth control. . . .It is socially irresponsible for a doctor to condemn a girl for asking for the pill, or to refuse it to her in the hope that it will stop her from having sexual intercourse . . . . He must also know that his denial of the pill to a girl forces her to adopt less effective methods of birth control or to use no method at all, and that when she subsequently becomes pregnant and asks for abortion the blame is as much his as it is that of the girl or her boyfriend.

Williams WV. (Correspondence) Abortion. Can Med Assoc J. 1974 Feb 02;110(3):261-262.

(Correspondence) Abortion and the pregnant teenager

Philip E Shea

Extract
The article “Abortion and the pregnant teenager” by Lipper et al (Can Med Assoc J 109: 852, 19173) is one of a series of articles which abortion clinics will undoubtedly produce in an effort to justify their actions. My initial reaction was to pick at the many inconsistencies in the article . . .But then it seemed that in doing so I was missing the point. The authors have many figures and graphs to demonstrate their findings. It is all so cold and scientific – so pat. But they have left out one fact which is of paramount importance and renders all the others meaningless: 100% of the babies died.

Shea PE. (Correspondence) Abortion and the pregnant teenager. Can Med Assoc J. 1974 Jan 19;110(2):143.