Category: Procedures & Services

Unacceptable to force doctors to participate in assisted dying against their conscience: CMA head

National Post

Sharon Kirkey

No physician in the country should be forced to play a role in any aspect of assisted dying against their moral or religious beliefs — including referring patients to another doctor willing to help them die, the Canadian Medical Association says.

Legalized physician-assisted death will usher in such a fundamental change in practice “we simply cannot accept a system that compels physicians to go against their conscience as individuals on something so profound as this,” CMA president Chris Simpson said in an exclusive interview.

The unanimous Supreme Court of Canada ruling legalizing assisted dying would not compel doctors to help patients end their lives when the historic decision takes effect next year.

But the justices were more guarded on the issue of mandatory referral, saying the Charter rights of both patients and doctors will need to be reconciled.

Dr. Simpson said that many doctors who conscientiously object to assisted dying feel the very act of referral “is contrary to their personal ethics or moral or religious beliefs.” . . . [Full text]

Giving doctors a choice on assisted suicide

National Post

The following is an open letter written by medical professionals to the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario.

Should Ontario’s doctors be forced to violate their consciences? On Feb. 6, the Supreme Court of Canada struck down the Criminal Code provisions against euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. Concurrently, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO) is proposing to oblige physicians, at the risk of professional discipline, to refer patients for procedures that a physician has refused for reasons of conscience, to a willing physician or agency established for such referrals.

This is a major shift in policy for the CPSO. Aside from Quebec, this position is not held by any other medical regulatory college in Canada and is inconsistent with the position of the Canadian Medical Association, the American Medical Association and similar bodies in Commonwealth countries. . . [Full Text]

Woman acted as surrogate mother for son’s IVF baby, court hears

Man in his 20s told he may adopt his biological son after court is told how he embarked on ‘process of becoming a father’ with assistance from his own mother

The Guardian

A woman acted as a surrogate mother for a baby whose biological father is her adult son, a family court judge has been told.

The man, who is in his mid-20s and lives alone, had taken advice from specialist lawyers before embarking on the “process of becoming a father”, Mrs Justice Theis heard. He had looked after the little boy – now seven months old – since birth. Theis has ruled that he can adopt.

Detail of the case emerged in a written ruling by Theis following a family court hearing in London. The judge said she had never encountered such a surrogacy arrangement before.

 

MP seeks to safeguard rights of anti-abortion admin staff

The Tablet

Paul Wilkinson

A Scottish Catholic MP will try to clarify the conscience clause in the 1967 Abortion Act in the next Parliament to allow hospital administrative staff to refuse to work on abortion cases.

Tom Clarke, the Labour member for Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill, has been pressing unsuccessfully for the Prime Minister David Cameron to support clarification of the clause since two Catholic midwives in Scotland failed to convince the Supreme Court that they should be excused from delegating, supervising and supporting staff involved in terminations. The court’s ruling in December said that conscientious objection only applies to those who participate in procedures or treatments that lead to an abortion. . . [Full text]

How far should a doctor go? MDs say they ‘need clarity’ on Supreme Court’s assisted suicide ruling

National Post

Sharon Kirkey

Canada’s doctors are seeking clarity from the federal government on what the Supreme Court of Canada intended in its landmark ruling on assisted dying, including the question of how far a doctor is permitted to go in contributing to a patient’s death.

“We’ve got a few key questions that we think need clarity and this is one of them: Is it euthanasia or is it assisted dying?” said the Canadian Medical Association’s director of ethics and professional affairs, Dr. Jeff Blackmer.

The powerful doctors’ lobby said it is not clear whether the high court has opened the door not just to assisted suicide  –  where a doctor writes a prescription for a lethal overdose of drugs the patient takes herself  –  but also to something many physicians find profoundly more uneasy: pushing the syringe themselves. . . [Full text]