Protection of Conscience Project Library
Service, not Servitude
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.
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.