Protection of Conscience Project Library
Service, not Servitude
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.
Extract
Doctors, won’t you admit yet that abortion is the only medical act other than euthanasia whose purpose is to kill people?
Stephens DS. (Correspondence) CMA’s response to abortion bill. Can Med Assoc J. 1990 Apr 15;142(8):798.
Extract
The CMA has proposed an amendment that would make abortion an indictable offence “unless [it] is induced by or under the direction of a medical practitioner in accordance with generally accepted standards of the medical profession”. The association has also asked that a new section be added to protect patients, hospitals and physicians from the “threat and costs of unjustified, politically or harassment-inspired criminal charges”. That amendment would mean that no prosecution could be instituted under the new law without consent of an attorney general. The CMA thinks this would help eliminate the laying of frivolous charges by antiabortionists . . .
Sullivan P. CMA brief slams abortion bill, says legislation not needed. Can Med Assoc J. 1990;142(4):377-378.
Extract
T he CMA Board of Directors has given final approval to a brief outlining the association’s stand on Bill C-43, the abortion legislation introduced by the federal government last fall. . . . It will restate physicians’ opposition to the placement of abortion – a medical procedure – in the Criminal Code. The CMA says abortion is the only medical procedure accorded such treatment. . . The brief will also address the problem of criminal and civil charges against doctors, and especially the harassment of physicians by those holding extremist views on this highly politicized issue. Many physicians are concerned this will happen if the bill passes in its original form.
Sullivan P. CMA board finalizes response to federal abortion bill. Can Med Assoc J. 1990;142(2):147-149.
Extract
Apart from such simple principles as the Golden Rule and the Greatest Good for the Greatest Number of People, what universal moral principles are there? Apparently Lemoine’s value system would compel unwilling pregnant women to become mothers against their will (the view of the Roman Catholic Church and other antichoice groups); this is in direct opposition to the position that couples should be allowed to regulate their own reproductivity, the view of the United Nations declaration on family planning, to which Canada was a signatory. Neither of these moral positions is universal or based on absolutes. The first arose out of the Christian Church’s desire to implement policies of demographic aggression against all other groups. The second arose in this century out of our collective appreciation that such policies may spell extinction for all forms of life on this planet. Many of the bloodiest episodes in history came about as a result of one group’s seeking to impose “universal” moral principles on others.
Watters WW. (Correspondence) “Universal” moral principles. Can Med Assoc J. 1989 May 01;140(9):1016.
Abstract
This paper uses the Churches’ responses to the controversy over abortion as a measure of the internalization of ecumenism. The data used in the essay include interviews with ecumenical officers and the minutes of the American Bishops Pro-life Committee. The main conclusion is that during the controversy “mainstream” Protestantism and Roman Catholicism reverted to post-Reformation and pre-Vatican II ideological roles, with Catholicism opposing under the banner of objective moral truth the legalization of abortion and liberal Protestantism under the banner of subjective conscience providing a belated religious justification to the legalization promoted first by secularist activists. This reversal to historic ideological roles actually distorted the more nuanced positions of these Churches in the controversy, but the lack of an ecumenical context obscured these shared tensions and prevented the Churches from contributing to a better public structuring of the moral ambiguities most Americans felt and still experience about abortion and the extent of its legalization. The essay concludes that only in an ecumenical context can religious pluralism lead to more inclusive moral commitments rather than to a further privatization of religion.
Kelly J. Ecumenism and Abortion: A Case Study of Pluralism, Privatization and Public Conscience. Rev Relig Res. 1989 Mar;30(3):225-235.
Abstract
Court-ordered caesarian sections against the explicit wishes of the pregnant woman have been criticised as violations of the woman’s fundamental right to autonomy and to the inviolability of the person-particularly, so it is argued, because the fetus in utero is not yet a person. This paper examines the logic of this position and argues that once the fetus has passed a certain stage of neurological development it is a person, and that then the whole issue becomes one of balancing of rights: the right-to-life of the fetal person against the right to autonomy and inviolability of the woman; and that the fetal right usually wins.
Kluge E-H. When caesarian section operations imposed by a court are justified. J Med Ethics. 1988 Dec;14(4) 206-211.
Extract
The NBMS Board of Directors adopted an abortion policy that stated: “The issue of abortion is a personal one between the patient and the physician governed by individual conscience and the law of the land.” . . . Following a protracted and impassioned debate, the statement was adopted. Feelings were running so high that in one case an NBMS member asked another doctor if he wished to “step outside” to discuss the issue.
Blair L. Abortion issue dominates NBMS annual meeting. Can Med Assoc J. 1988;139(8):797.
Extract
It was a delight to read the frank and well-written article by Dr. William G. Green (Can Med Assoc J 1988; 139: 325-326) “I have no answer to the abortion issue, but here is the question”. There has been so much heat and emotion surrounding this issue . . . We have heard too much from those at the extremes.
Simpson CA. (Correspondence) Abortion: cool common sense. Can Med Assoc J. 1988 Oct 01;139(7):612.
Extract
While physicians opposed to abortion have responded with articles . . . most doctors from the pro-choice side have remained quiet. Dr. Robbie Mahood is an exception. . . . “I certainly don’t support abortion as a method of birth control”. Has the abortion issue creat- ed divisions in the medical profession? “Certainly there is disagreement within the profession about this, but this probably reflects the division within the general population”, Mahood said. “I would guess that there is a pro-choice majority [among physicians].”
Sullivan P. Dr. Robbie Mahood: Pro-choice physician says doctors have a duty to speak out. Can Med Assoc J. 1988;138(8):734. Available from: