Project News Releases Archives - Page 8 of 9 - Protection of Conscience Project News

Planned Parenthood and “Anti-Choice” Rhetoric

News Release

Protection of Conscience Project

Planned Parenthood Alberta is recycling the accusation that physicians who object to abortion may “scare” patients with “misinformation” or “impose their moral beliefs.” This smear may be unfairly applied to conscientious objectors who follow the guidelines of the Canadian Medical Association (CMA) and the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta (CPSA).

The CMA advises physicians to inform a patient when their personal morality would influence their recommendations or practice, and to advise patients of their objections to abortion. The CPSA expects physicians to provide information to patients seeking abortion so that they can “make informed decisions on all available options for their pregnancies, including termination.”

On the other hand, objecting physicians can hardly be expected to present morally controversial procedures as morally uncontroversial, or in such a way as to indicate that they approve of them or are indifferent to them. Moreover, the information they reasonably believe necessary to permit the patient to make a truly “informed decision” may be more comprehensive or in other respects different from what Planned Parenthood is accustomed to provide its clients.

An interest group like Planned Parenthood might well stigmatize such discussion as ‘moralizing’ and providing ‘misinformation’. Partisan polemics of this sort do not provide a basis for sound policy making.

Planned Parenthood Alberta is compiling a list of what it calls “anti-choice doctors.” If it is desirable to help patients find physicians who share their outlook on moral issues, it would be preferable for doctors to identify themselves, perhaps through the College of Physicians and Surgeons or professional associations.

But if Planned Parenthood persists in its plan to identify “anti-choice doctors”, it should include in its list the names of physicians who believe that their colleagues should be forced to provide or facilitate morally controversial procedures.

Aryan Defender Highlights BC Medical Journal

News Release

Protection of Conscience Project

It is an unusual cover for a medical journal: a crouching, brawny Aryan hero, glowering murderously from under a horned helmet, a copper IUD clutched in his sword hand.

The Administrator of the Protection of Conscience Project wants to post the cover of the January/February edition of the BC Medical Journal on the Project website. In a letter to the editor of the Journal, he describes the cover as “a splendid illustration of the usual basis for conscientious objection to potentially abortifacient devices and drugs.”

Most physicians or others who object to the IUD (intrauterine device) and the ‘morning-after-pill’ do so because such things may act – not by preventing fertilization – but by destroying the developing human embryo by preventing its implantation in the uterine wall. This mechanism of action is explicitly acknowledged in the Journal’s article, written by Dr. Roey Malleson.

Rather than recognizing that the destruction of the developing embryo is a key moral issue – and a controversial one – Dr. Malleson defines the issue out of existence by adopting a coded vocabulary. Only readers familiar with authoritative embryological texts are likely to recognize the polemic behind Dr. Malleson’s use of words like ‘abortifacient’, ‘pregnancy’, and ‘contraception’.

The Project letter lauds the article as “an excellent example of moral obfuscation masquerading as science,” but challenges Dr. Malleson’s authority to tutor colleagues in faith and morals. It rejects the suggestion that civil suits might be used to suppress the freedom of conscience of those who do not share the BC Medical Journal’s enthusiasm for Aryan warriors.

Draft Bill Lacks Conscience Protection, Erodes Trial by Jury

News Release

Protection of Conscience Project

The Canadian government’s proposed Assisted Human Reproduction Act lacks protection for health care workers and others who do not want to participate in morally controversial procedures, and erodes the customary right to trial by jury, according to a letter sent earlier this month to Allan Rock, Canadian Minister of Health.

Project Administrator Sean Murphy noted that, beyond the procedures allowed in the draft text, the bill provides for ad hoc legalization of activities by Orders in Council, which do not require parliamentary scrutiny or approval.

Murphy suggested that the bill would establish an expectation of entitlement to legalized procedures, and cautioned that problems will arise for conscientious objectors, especially if provision of the “controlled activities” were made a condition for federal health care grants or transfer payments.

“Experience in Canada and elsewhere suggests that conscientious objectors will . . . be subjected to coercion and discrimination” or “forced into expensive litigation before human rights tribunals or courts . . . to buy the freedom that ought to have been their birthright.”

The letter requests that the bill be amended to include protection of conscience provisions.

Murphy also expressed alarm that the bill erodes the right to trial by jury for serious offences. He argued that it would be more consistent with Canadian legal traditions to reduce the bill’s summary conviction penalties to bring them into line with those now customary in criminal law.

Appeal to Muslim Physicians

News Release

Protection of Conscience Project

Dr. Shahid Athar, an advisor to the Protection of Conscience Project and President of the Islamic Medical Association of North America, has issued the following appeal in the wake of yesterday’s tragic attacks on American cities:

Re : The Disaster Relief Work

I direct and request Muslim Physicians in New York, Washington D.C. in particular and Muslim physicians elsewhere to do the following:

1. Help and organize local blood donation drives in Muslim communities and direct them to proper hospitals in the area.

2. Offer emergency relief work in the affected areas through your mosque as focal point

3. Offer social and psychological support for the families of the victims.

4. Have a local spokesperson who should be in touch with me and the national Muslim leadership.

5. Denounce all acts of terrorism and uphold the sanctity of human life.

6. Pray for the innocent lives lost and the injured and their relatives.

7. Report to the authorities and C.A.I.R. in your area any incidents of harassment or threat against any Muslim, or Muslim organization.

8. Protect yourself, your family, your mosque, fellow Muslims and fellow Americans. Allah is the best of all protectors.

Shahid Athar,MD 317-872-5159 SATHAR3624@AOL.COM

World’s First Faculty of Bioethics Announced

News Release

Protection of Conscience Project

The world’s first faculty of bioethics will begin offering first year Bachelor, Master and Doctorate courses in October, 2001.

A two year (four semester) bachelor’s degree will offer basic interdisciplinary preparation courses and seminars in five areas: bioethics, medicine, law, philosophy and theology. The master’s degree requires two more years (four semesters) of study, concluding with a comprehensive final examination..

The Bioethics Faculty is an initiative of the Pontifical Athenaeum Regina Apostolorum, a Catholic ecclesiastical university centre. The faculty is assisted by an international Scientific Council of 23 experts from 11 countries. Among them is Dr. John Fleming, Director of the Southern Cross Bioethics Institute, and a member of the Protection of Conscience Project Advisory Board.

Sean Murphy, Administrator of the non-denominational Protection of Conscience Project, welcomed the initiative.

“One of the criticisms of bioethics, as it is too often practised in North America, is that it is an expression of the hidden faith of secularism,” said Murphy. “The unexamined beliefs of the establishment elite are often the root of their intolerance of conscientious objectors.”

“By working explicitly within a philosophical tradition and faith perspective,” he explained, “the new faculty will illustrate that different beliefs about the nature of the human person lead to different ethical conclusions.”

“Once that becomes clear,” he concluded, “we may hope to see more meaningful and productive discourse about pluralism and freedom of conscience .”