Service, not Servitude
Extract
I would be grateful if readers would let me know if reports we hear about British hospital practice are factual or not. We are told that candidates for obstetrical and gynaecological posts are first asked if they will co-operate in the abortion programme of that hospital, and their selection depends on the answer to this question.. .
Dunn H. (Correspondence) Obstetric Appointments and the Abortion Act. Br Med J. 1971 May 22;2(5759):464. Available from:
Extract
Concerning the problem of abortion several articles of which have since appeared some time in the Journal, personally I defend the right to the life of a human being, even if he is only a few days old, is innocent and cannot defend himself.
Borreman E. (Correspondence) L’avortement therapeutique (French). Can Med Assoc J. 1971;104(5):421.
Extract
. . . Is the fetus entitled to the same protection as the adult human being? . . . I would challenge any reader to define a human being in any other way than in such relational terms as mother, son, wife or neighbour; only as we relate to people in these terms do we come to know who we are. Psychological or biological definitions are singularly inapt for this purpose. . . .
Heine C. (Correspondence) Therapeutic abortion. Can Med Assoc J. 1971 March 6;104(5):421.
Extract
The two cases described by Dr. Boyce belong to two very different categories and probably should not be associated even for statistical purposes because of the vast difference between x-ray exposures resulting from diagnostic procedures and therapeutic applications. . . Hence my point: radiation received in x-ray diagnosis is not a valid reason for therapeutic abortion.
Stapleton J. (Correspondence) Therapeutic abortion in a Canadian city. Can Med Assoc J. 1971;104(1):70.
Arthur ME Kennedy
Extract
The appearance of the two letters on abortion in sequence in the Journal . . . illustrated the diverging ethics of the members and future members of our profession. Reading the letter by Dr. Heine was indeed like feeling a breath of fresh unpolluted air in the smog of today’s confused thinking. . . .How different was the letter by the President of the Medical Students’ Society of McGill University stating the unanimous opinion of their Executive Council.
Kennedy AM. (Correspondence) Abortion. Can Med Assoc J. 1971 Jan 09;104(1):70.
Extract
I cannot believe that the majority of physicians in Canada really couldn’t care less about such vital problems as the unwanted pregnancy and its reaction on the subsequent mental health of the mother (and unwanted child), not to mention the increasing threat to our way of life from overpopulation. I can only conclude that it is the wish not to be involved which permits major decisions to be swayed by a small but vocal group of religious bigots -sincere, well-meaning, God-fearing people, no doubt, but bigots just the same in that they seek to enforce the attitudes and wishes of a minority upon the majority.
Burrows W. (Correspondence) Abortion. Can Med Assoc J. 1970;103(12):1316.
Extract
It seems to me that social services do remarkably little for either the unmarried girl or the married women with poor housing conditions, even if they could be persuaded to continue with their pregnancy. It is not surprising that they suffer from a reactive depression, and I believe that abortion should be available to them on the National Health Service. It is speedily avail able in the private sector for those who can afford or can borrow the money. Unfortunately the waiting list for outpatient appointments is increasing, and there may be unavoidable delay in admission to hospital.
Arthure H. (Correspondence) Abortions under the NHS. Br Me. J. 1970;4(5735):617.
Extract
. . . Apart from a difference in maturity, there is no essential difference biologically between the prenatal and the postnatal child. It would appear, however, that those who believe in liberalized abortion ignore completely the most simple biological facts about the prenatal child and assume that life begins at birth and that whatever goes on before this is so mysterious that it can hardly be called life. . . Those who say that a law should be passed making abortion a purely medical question and independent of the law are in fact saying that the prenatal child does not deserve any legal right to life whatsoever. . .
Coffey P. (Correspondence) Abortion. Can Med Assoc J. 1970 Nov 21;103(11):1194, 1196.
Extract
The article “Therapeutic Abortion in a Canadian City” (Canad. Med. Ass. 1., 103: 461, 1970) is an interesting contribution to the current discussion of therapeutic abortion and is obviously the result of a good deal of conscientious study of a large number of hospital records. . . There is one feature about the article, however, which gives me some concern. This is the inclusion, among the relatively small number of medical grounds for abortion in this series, of the reason “Gross exposure to radiation”. . . . It would be most unfortunate if “gross exposure to radiation” were interpreted as referring to medical exposures involved in diagnosis . . .
Stapleton J. (Correspondence) Therapeutic abortion in a Canadian city. Can Med Assoc J. 1970 Nov 7;103(10):1085-1086.
Extract
The first case (1962) was a 38-year-old woman suspected of having lumbar intervertebral disc disease who, shortly after conception, had radiological examinations on two occasions which included her pelvis. . . The second case (1963) was a 34-year-old woman with carcinoma of the cervix, which was discovered when the patient presented with a pregnancy of approximately 16 weeks’ duration. She was treated initially with cobalt. Abortion did not occur as had been expected following this. The obstetrician then proceeded to induce abortion. . . following which the carcinoma was treated by insertion of radium into the cervix.
Boyce M. (Correspondence) Therapeutic abortion in a Canadian city (author replies). Can Med Assoc J. 1970;103(10):1088.