CPSS undermines, Supreme Court of Canada affirms conscience rights for Saskatchewan doctors

News Release

Christian Medical Dental Society of Canada

SASKATOON, March 6, 2015 /CNW/ – Several Saskatchewan physicians, including Dr. Amos Akinbiyi, Dr. Philip Fitzpatrick, and Dr. Randy Friesen, released a letter and legal brief (see below), today, describing how the conscience rights of Saskatchewan doctors are undermined by the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Saskatchewan (CPSS) draft policy on requirements for physicians and surgeons and upheld by the Supreme Court of Canada’s recent decision on assisted suicide in Carter, et al.

Said Dr. Philip Fitzpatrick, “In the recent Carter decision from the Supreme Court, they made explicit reference to conscience rights, and that physicians could not be forced to participate in an abortion or euthanasia. But the CPSS’s draft policy would require me to make a formal referral to another physician where my conscience would not permit me to do those procedures, and could require me to do it myself.”

The letter and brief (see below) were initiated by physicians who are members of the Christian Medical and Dental Society of Canada (CMDS) and the Canadian Federation of Catholic Physicians’ Societies (CFCPS).

CPSS is circulating a draft policy that would require physicians and surgeons to make a formal referral of patients to a physician or surgeon who would be willing to perform the legally permissible and publicly funded health services, irrespective of conscience rights. If another physician were not available to perform the service, the physician would be required to provide the service, whether or not performing the service conflicted with conscience.

“The CPSS seems to be creating conflicts between medical doctors’ conscience rights and patient care unnecessarily. No doctors concerned about conscience rights would put their patients’ health and well-being in jeopardy. I find that patients are very appreciative of my concern for their health and of my outlining all the options and alternatives for treatment,” said Dr. Friesen.

In their letter to CPSS and the accompanying legal brief, the Saskatchewan doctors outlined their concerns with the draft policy and how a few amendments to it would provide the conscience rights protections upheld by the Court.

“Saskatchewan is a dynamic province with a growing population. Saskatchewan needs physicians, especially General Practitioners. GPs would be most affected by the CPSS policy. Our province will have a hard time keeping and recruiting GPs to serve communities where they would be required by the policy as now drafted to make care decisions they believe will harm patients,” added Dr. Akinbiyi.

CMDS represents more than 1600 physicians, surgeons and dentists across Canada and CFCPS is a national association of Catholic physicians’ guilds, associations and societies from eleven cities across Canada.

Letter: http://goo.gl/nKi6JN and the Legal Brief: http://goo.gl/Nf3Bp7.

SOURCE Christian Medical and Dental Society of Canada

For further information: Larry Worthen, (902) 880-2495

Uniform coercive policy urged for all Canadian physicians

Project submission to the Saskatchewan College of Physicians discloses details

News Release

Protection of Conscience Project

The Protection of Conscience Project has charged that a controversial policy proposed by the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Saskatchewan is unjustified.

The policy, Conscientious Refusal, will require all Saskatchewan physicians who object to a procedure for reasons of conscience to facilitate the procedure by referring patients to a colleague who will provide it, even if it is homicide or suicide.

The Project noted that the burden of proof was on the policy’s supporters to prove that the policy is justified and that no less oppressive alternatives are available.  “They failed to do so,” states the submission. “The policy should be withdrawn.”

“Conscientious Refusal fails to recognize that the practice of medicine is a moral enterprise, that morality is a human enterprise, and that physicians, no less than patients, are moral agents” said the Project, describing the policy as “profoundly disrespectful of the moral agency of physicians.”

Using documents provided by the College, the Project’s submission traces the origin of the policy to a meeting in 2013. The meeting was apparently convened by the Conscience Research Group (CRG), activist academics whose goal is to compel physicians unwilling to provide morally contested procedures like abortion or euthanasia to refer patients to someone willing to do so. They presented a coercive model policy that had been drafted to achieve that goal.

According to a CPSS memo, College attendees included Saskatchewan Associate Registrar Bryan Salte, Dr. Gus Grant, Registrar of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Nova Scotia, Andréa Foti of the Policy Department of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario and a representative of the Collège des Médecins du Québec. They agreed upon a text virtually identical to the CRG model.

In May, 2014, Bryan Salte proposed the policy to Registrars of the Colleges of British Columbia, Alberta, Manitoba and Ontario, who, he reported, agreed to review it and consider implementing it. He later urged all of the Registrars of Colleges of Physicians in Canada to adopt the coercive policy or one very like it, noting that “physician assisted suicide, in particular” would be present a challenge for administrators.

“Any College that is an outlier, either because it has adopted a different position than other Colleges, or because it has not developed a policy, will potentially be placed in a difficult position,” he warned.

The CPSS memo discloses that, unbeknownst to physicians, officials in several provinces have been making plans behind closed doors to suppress freedom of conscience in the medical profession.

“One of the disturbing aspects of the story,” notes the submission, “is what appears to be a pattern of concealment, selective disclosure, and false or misleading statements that all serve the purpose of supporting the policy.”

The Project’s most recent submission to the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario identifies a similarly troubling pattern, describing briefing materials supplied to College Council in support of its controversial policy as “not only seriously deficient, but erroneous and seriously misleading.”

Project Submission to the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Saskatchewan (2015)

Project Submission to the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (2015)

Doctors who refuse to provide services on moral grounds could face discipline under new Ontario policy

National Post

Sharon Kirkey

Doctors who refuse to prescribe birth control or other medical services because of their personal values could face possible disciplinary actions, Canada’s largest medical regulator says.

Moral or religious convictions of a doctor cannot impede a patient’s access to care, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario said Friday in a 21-3 vote supporting an updated Professional and Human Rights policy.

The policy makes clear: “You cannot kick someone out of your office without care,” said Dr. Marc Gabel, past president of the college and chairman of the policy’s working group.

Some council members said the new code, which the college expects physicians to comply with or face complaints of professional misconduct, could lead to “state-run” medicine, while others said the church has no place in a doctor’s office. . . [Full text]

Ontario College of Physicians approves policy compelling doctors to abort, euthanize in some cases

LifeSite  News

Steve Weatherbe

TORONTO, March 6, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Ontario doctors could be compelled to perform abortions and euthanasia after the professional regulator’s ruling council approved its controversial new policy Friday morning in a 21-3 vote.

The College announced today in a news release that its new Professional Obligations and Human Rights policy “requires physicians to provide their patients with an effective referral to another health-care provider for those services the physician chooses not to provide for reasons of conscience or religion.”

But it does more, and requires doctors not only to refer but to provide service if required to alleviate “suffering.”

Commented one of the policy’s severest critics, Sean Murphy of the Protection of Conscience Project: “The Ontario College of Physicians has decided they are prepared to compel physicians to do what they consider is wrong, even homicide or suicide and punish them if they refuse. If institutions can order citizens to do what they believe is evil, what can they not do?” . . . [Full text]

UPDATED: Ontario doctors must refer for abortions, says College of Physicians

The Catholic Register

Michael Swan

TORONTO – Despite an overwhelmingly negative response from members of the public, physicians and organizations during a three-month online consultation, the Ontario College of Physicians and Surgeons voted 21-3 to force doctors to refer for abortions, contraception and other legal treatments or procedures even if they have moral or religious objections.

A last-minute submission from the Ontario Medical Association urging the college not to force doctors to act directly against their moral or religious convictions failed to sway the governing council of the college to reconsider wording that demands doctors provide “an effective referral to another health-care provider” despite personal convictions, whether religious or moral.

The college did not provide a statistical breakdown of the 16,000 submissions it received online, other than to say that 90 per cent were from members of the public and most were against the policy. . . [Full text]