Hearings on Quebec Bill 52: College of Physicians

Dr. Charles Bernard, Dr. Yves Robert, Dr. Michelle Marchand

Tuesday 17 September 2013 – Vol. 43 N° 34

Note: The following translation is the product of a first run through “Google translate.”  In most cases it is sufficient to identify statements of interest, but more careful translation is required to properly understand the text.

Original Text

Caution: machine assisted translation

M. Bernard (Charles) : Merci, M. le Président. Alors, M. le Président, Mme la ministre, Mmes, MM. les parlementaires, alors le Collège des médecins du Québec vous remercie de lui permettre de vous présenter ses réflexions sur le projet de loi n° 52 concernant les soins de fin de vie, et j’ajouterais que nous sommes honorés d’être les premiers à auditionner devant cette commission en cette journée de rentrée parlementaire, alors on vous en remercie. Thank you, Mr. President. So, Mr. President, Madam Minister, Mrs, Mr. parliamentarians, while the College of Physicians of Quebec thank you for allowing him to present his thoughts on Bill No. 52 on the end-of-life, and I would add that we are honored to be the first to audition before the Committee on this day parliamentary session, so we thank you.
Alors, ce projet de loi constitue, à nos yeux, un jalon très important dans la réflexion sur les soins de vie, et, à notre avis, il devrait être adopté. Amorcée en mai 2006 à l’occasion de notre assemblée générale annuelle, cette réflexion s’est transformée en un vaste débat public, à l’issu duquel la Commission spéciale sur la question de mourir dans la dignité a remis sont rapport en mars 2012. D’entrée de jeu, vous nous permettrez de souligner le travail exceptionnel effectué sur ce sujet extrêmement complexe et sensible par tous les parlementaires, et en particulier le vôtre, Mme la ministre, vous avez fait preuve d’un respect, d’une qualité d’écoute, d’une rigueur et d’une compréhension des enjeux d’une rare qualité, et nous vous en remercions sincèrement, cela mérite d’être souligné. So this bill is, in our view, a very important milestone in thinking about life care, and, in our opinion, should be adopted. Began in May 2006 at our annual general meeting, the discussion turned into a broad public debate, the end of which the Special Committee on Dying with Dignity are handed over in March 2012. From the outset, please allow us to recognize the outstanding work done on this topic extremely complex and sensitive by all parliamentarians, particularly yours, Madam Minister, you have demonstrated compliance, quality listening, rigor and an understanding of the challenges of a rare quality, and we sincerely thank you, it deserves to be highlighted.

Full Translation

Artificial reproduction unregulated in Ireland

Artificial reproduction is not regulated in Ireland, so that sperm and egg donors and people having recourse to it and children conceived or carried to term in surrogacy arrangements may have to go to court to determine their legal status and relationships.  Questions about what to do with embryos abandoned by their parents have also arisen, although this problem also exists in jurisdictions that regulate the procedures.  The Irish Ministry of Health is now considering regulatory proposals. [Irish Examiner]

El problema de la objeción de conciencia no regulada

Cuando la conciencia molesta a la ley

Sean Murphy*

A finales de 2010, en la Asamblea Parlamentaria del Consejo de Europa (PACE) se presentó un informe de su Comisión de Asuntos Sociales, Salud y Familia en el que expresaba su profunda preocupación por el problema de la “objeción de conciencia no regulada” en Europa. El Comité propuso que los Estados adoptaran “una regulación integral y clara” para hacer frente a este problema. . .[aceprensa]

Embryos abandoned by parents present ethical, legal quandary

The Calgary Herald reports that fewer than 5% (20,000) of the roughly 400,000 frozen embryos at fertility clinics in the United States have been abandoned by their parents.  It suggests that over 135,000 frozen embryos are stored at clinics in Canada; a  5% rate would imply over 6,700 abandoned embryos.  That figure might be too low, since one clinic is reported to have 1,000 “unclaimed” embryos.  The American Society for Reproductive Medicine has decided that clinics can destroy embryos that have been abandoned for at least five years, the parents cannot be located, and there are no written instructions to indicate what should be done with them.  The guidance is legally and ethically contested. [Calgary Herald]

Irish Times publishes false “abortion” story

Paper admits “abortion” did not happen

No explanation offered for fabricated “news”

Sean Murphy*

The controversy surrounding Ireland’s new abortion law has been further inflamed by a story by Irish Times Health reporter Paul Cullen.  The story first appeared on 23 August, 2013.  Its accuracy was immediately disputed, and the paper had to add note stating that the article was erroneous in claiming that an “abortion” had occurred at the National Maternity Hospital in Dublin “under the provisions of the new abortion legislation,” which had not yet come into effect. Nonetheless, in an interview the following day, Cullen continued to insist that the reported “abortion” had occurred at the hospital, and that the public had a “right to know” about it.

The Irish Times has now been forced to remove the article from its website because it was found to be false.  Despite Mr. Cullen’s concern about the public’s “right to know,” the paper has offered no explanation to account for the fabrication of the story and the failure of editorial oversight that permitted its publication.

A significant issue raised by the incident is a dispute about what constitutes an “abortion.”  A protest outside the Irish Times organized by Irish pro-life organizations Youth Defence and Life Institute included statements and signs to the effect that premature delivery of a baby (presumably resulting in death) is not an “abortion,” but “medical treatment” intended to save the life of the mother.  It is by no means clear that the Irish Times or those favouring legalization of abortion accept this distinction.  Differences on this point are likely to complicate the exercise of freedom of conscience by health care workers who do not wish to participate in abortion.