The Australia and New Zealand Society for Palliative Medicine (ANZSPM) has issued a statement opposing euthanasia and assisted suicide. Statements of this kind indicate that the legalization of the procedures would generate significant conflicts of conscience among members of the medical community.
Update on American HHS controversy
The Becket Fund reports that there are 79 court cases involving 200 plaintiffs now moving through the U.S. courts, challenging the federal regulation requiring employers with over 50 employees to provide health insurance for birth control and surgical sterilization. Of the 40 lawsuits filed by for-profit corporations, 32 have been granted injunctions against the law, and only six refused.
Belgium considering euthanasia for children
Belgian politicians are debating a bill proposed by the governing Socialist party to legalize euthanasia for children (with parental consent). The bill would also abolish the current 5 year limitation on advance directives for euthanasia in order to make the procedure available to persons with dementia. [ABC News]
European parliament narrowly rejects report attacking freedom of conscience
By a narrow margin (351/319) the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe rejected a Report on Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights put forward by Edite Estrela of the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality. The report complained of what it called “the abuse of conscientious objection” with respect to abortion in Ireland, Malta and Poland and other countries:
Conscientious objection’s practice has denied many women access to
reproductive health services, such as information about, access to, and purchase of contraception, prenatal testing, and lawful interruption of pregnancy. There are cases reported from Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Poland, Ireland and Italy where nearly 70% of all gynaecologists and 40% of all anaesthesiologists conscientiously object to providing abortion services.
It described conscientious objection to abortion as “widespread” and demanded that states should regulate and monitor the exercise of freedom of conscience – at least freedom of conscience exercised by “reproductive health care providers.” The authors also assert institutions (such as hospitals) should not be allowed to operate according to conscientious or religious convictions. In its complaints about “the unregulated use of conscientious objection,” the report repeated the complaint of a 2010 report that was also rejected by the Assembly.
However, a minority opinion by author Anna Zaborska stated:
This non-binding resolution violates the EU Treaty and cannot be used to introduce right to abortion. . .No international legally binding treaty nor the ECHR nor customary international law can accurately be cited as establishing or recognizing such right. All EU institutions, bodies and agencies must remain neutral on the issue of abortion. . . . The human right of conscientious objection together with the responsibility of the state to ensure that patients are able to access medical care in particular in cases of emergency prenatal and maternal health care must be upheld. No person, hospital or institution shall be coerced, held liable or discriminated against in any manner because of a refusal to perform, accommodate, assist or submit to practices which could cause the death of a human embryo.
The report has been returned to the committee for review, but there is no doubt that a similar report will be returned for another vote some time in the future. [Christian Medical Comment; CNS News]
Hearings on Quebec Bill 52: Committee of Legal Experts
Jean-Pierre Ménard, Michelle Giroux
Thursday, 10 October 2013 – Vol. 43 No. 46
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. Translation block numbers (T#) have been assigned by the Project as references to facilitate analysis and discussion.
Original Text |
T# |
Caution: raw machine translation |
17 h (version non révisée) |
Unrevised version |
|
| (Reprise à 17 h 14) | ||
| La Présidente (Mme Proulx) : À l’ordre, s’il vous plaît! La commission va poursuivre ses travaux. | 001 | The Chair (Mrs. Proulx): Order, please! The Committee will continue its work. |
| Alors, je souhaite la bienvenue à nos invités. Je vous demanderais tout d’abord de vous présenter et je vous rappelle que vous disposez d’environ 15 minutes pour votre présentation. La parole est à vous. | 002 | So I welcome our guests. I would ask you first introduce yourself and let me remind you that you have 15 minutes for your presentation. The floor is yours. |
| M. Ménard (Jean-Pierre): Alors donc, bonjour, Mme la ministre, mesdames, messieurs les députés. Alors, mon nom est Jean-Pierre Ménard, je suis président du Comité de juristes experts que le précédent gouvernement avait désigné en 2012 pour examiner la suite à donner aux recommandations de la commission de mourir dans la dignité. | 003 | Mr. Ménard (Jean-Pierre): So then, hello, Madam Minister, ladies and gentlemen. So, my name is Jean-Pierre Ménard, I am Chairman of the legal experts that the previous government had appointed in 2012 to review the follow-up to the recommendations of the Committee on Dying with Dignity |