Myre Sim Archives - Protection of Conscience Project Library

(Correspondence) CPL poll on abortion angers many physicians

Myre Sim

Canadian Medical Association Journal, CMAJ — Canadian Medical Association Journal

Extract
What kind of society does Klein advocate that would prevent questions from being put to the medical profession because they do not reflect his own bias? The physicians and surgeons polled were very much aware of the abortion issue and were not likely to be influenced by a loaded opinion poll. The fact that 16% of the 50 000 physicians who were polled responded suggests that a considerable number of Canadian doctors are willing to have their views recorded, and the fact that 68% were critical of CMA policy indicates that several thousand doctors are not in favour of it. Compare the 40 to 50 letters received by the CMA concerning the poll, most of which urged the CMA to ignore the poll results and to confirm the present policy.

Sim M. (Correspondence) CPL poll on abortion angers many physicians. Can Med Assoc J. 1990 Jan 1;142(1).

(Correspondence) Abortion: it is time for doctors to get off the fence

CE Cragg

Extract
In response to Dr. Myre Sim’s shopworn fulminations (Can Med Assoc 11988; 138: 742- 743), I am one doctor who has been off the fence and on firm ground for some time on the matter of abortion. . . The key to reducing the problem of ethically troublesome abortions remains quick, easy access to abortion, which includes improvement in the early identification of genetic defects. The key to reducing the numbers of abortions includes increasing awareness of the still dire need of children for information about sex, sexuality and birth control and increasing promotion of ethics as an object of study in school.

Cragg CE. (Correspondence) Abortion: it is time for doctors to get off the fence. Can Med Assoc J. 1988 Jul 16;139(2):99.

(Correspondence) Abortion: Is it time for doctors to get off the fence? Dr. Sim responds

Myre Sim

Extract
All medical procedures should have proper medical indications; and when these indications are being abused strict guidelines are laid down by the profession; those who ignore them are censured. . . .Bart would have abortion specifically excluded from such guidelines, yet abortion carries certain death for the fetus as well as hazards for the pregnant woman. Medical ethics are specifically designed to curb unwholesome and dangerous medical practices. . . abortion on nonmedical grounds, which includes most, is a male- inspired maneuver. . .

Sim M. (Correspondence) Abortion: Is it time for doctors to get off the fence? Dr. Sim responds. Can Med Assoc J. 1988 Jun 15;139(4):1085.

(Correspondence) Abortion Act in Practice

Myre Sim

British Medical Journal, BMJ — British Medical Journal

Extract
The Act does not give Dr. Hughes the right to castigate those psychiatrists who, acting “in good faith,” are seriously in doubt as to whether an abortion is justified, and for good reasons know that support and treatment would be at least as effective as abortion in dealing with the problem be it-social or medical. They have ample clinical evidence- to support the ” good faith ” of their decisions . . .. It would be of great interest to see- what factual evidence could be produced to support the many decisions to abort under the present Act.

Sim M. (Correspondence) Abortion Act in Practice. Br Med J. 1969 Apr 5;2(5648):50-51.

(Correspondence) GMC and Abortion Act, 1967

Myre Sim

Extract
It is difficult for the ordinary doctor like myself to understand the role of the G.M.C. as regards medical ethics. Its change in attitude over abortion would suggest that the law of the land takes precedence over medical ethics, for the present law permits abortion for non-medical reasons. Does this mean that the G.M.C. will maintain only those medical ethics which do not conflict with the law, and that laws permitting euthanasia and sterilization of the unfit would receive similar sanction ? There is surely a conflict here not only between the G.M.C. and individual doctors but between the G.M.C. and those medical ethics which have international recognition..

Sim M. (Correspondence) GMC and Abortion Act, 1967. Br Med J. 1968 May 4;2(5600):298.

(Correspondence) Abortion and Conscience

Alan Sanderson

Extract
Dr. Myre Sim (4 November, p. 297) exhorts those of us without religious objections to abortion to heed our medical consciences. He is so convinced of the rightness of his views that he brands any doctor who acts differently as lacking in conscience. I do not agree with this assumption. Many highly conscientious doctors favour abortion on social grounds. . . . For most of us it takes courage to recommend or to perform an abortion. It is an operation from which we shrink with a natural abhorrence. How much easier it is to do nothing, especially if inaction can be condoned by invoking ” medical conscience.”

Sanderson A. (Correspondence) Abortion and Conscience. Br Med J. 1967 Dec 09;4(5579):621.

(Correspondence) Abortion and Conscience

Myre Sim

Extract
One point seems clear, and that is the new law will permit a doctor to refuse to recommend or perform an abortion on grounds of conscience. This clause was intended to protect those doctors (and nurses) with strong religious objections to abortion. There are, however, conscientious objections other than religious. There is a medical conscience which dictates that one should not interrupt the process of human life unless there is good evidence that such a measure is entirely justified in order to avert a dangerous situation. . . That the law makes it permissive for doctors who have not got this medical conscience does not remove from the doctor who possesses one the right to act according to it. It would be intolerable for a doctor to be pressurized into what he considers to be bad medical practice in order to conform with a new law.

Sim M. (Correspondence) Abortion and Conscience. Br Med J. 1967 Nov 4;4(5574):297.

(Correspondence) Abortion Bill

Myre Sim

Extract
Under the title of Medical Termination of Pregnancy, this Bill would expose to legal action a surgeon who refused to abort on sound clinical grounds, and therefore in good faith, yet his defence would be stronger if he claimed he refused to abort on grounds of conscience.

Sim M. (Correspondence) Abortion Bill. Br Med J. 1967 May 20;2(5550):511.