Personal Qualms Don’t Count

Foothills Hospital Now Forces Nurses To Participate In Genetic Terminations

Calgary, Alberta, Canada

 Marnie Ko

 “The present mood is…chaotic, helpless, frustrated and highly emotional,” Sally wrote. In the past weeks, I have witnessed tears, breakdowns, illnesses, and stress such as never before…Sick calls have been high and experienced staff nearly impossible to recruit.”

 

Though the tiny infant had been condemned to die, distraught nurses at Calgary’s Foothills Hospital spent hours last August caring for it anyway.

“The mother didn’t want the baby, so we took turns rocking and holding it for 12 hours until it finally died,” says Foothills nurse “Catherine,” whose real name has been withheld to protect her job. “Nurses were only allowed to comfort the suffering infant, but this did not even include feedings.”

The rejected baby’s fate was sealed when it survived a “genetic termination,” an abortion performed only five weeks before the mother’s due date. Doctors had told her that her baby had lethal genetic defects. But Catherine could see only a baby. “I was sick for weeks,” she says. [Full text]

Med-school admission committees: tainted by pro-choice bias?

Williard Johnston, M.D.*

Recently, a worried pre-med student called me. A year ago her interview had gone badly, partly because her pro-life views became known to her interviewer, a woman whose pro-choice sentiments have been expressed to me personally in the past. Back for another try, her interview somehow ended up on the same topic.

A few months ago I met a new colleague at my community hospital. He reminded me of a conversation we had had several years ago, when he had phoned me for advice after losing his position at a public health clinic. He  had done well in the job, and was about to be hired permanently, when the non-physician office manager called him in for an “interview” and bluntly exposed his pro-life leanings. “It’s men like you who ruin the lives of  young women,” was her tactful observation. He was informed that he would be given no further sessions at the publicly funded downtown clinic, and was more or less told to pack his bags. Now in private practice not far from me, he still wonders if he did the right thing by accepting this treatment silently.

However, there is a far more basic threat to the ability of physicians to hold pro-life views.[Full text]

Chinese health care workers and the ‘one-child’ policy

Since at least1991, Australia has been faced with Chinese women who apply for refugee status because of China’s ‘one-child policy.’  Senate committee hearings were conducted into the matter. One of the witnesses, who identifed herself by the pseudonym “Dr. Wong”, was heard by the committee in February, 1995, and July, 1999. The following extracts provide some information about the operation of the ‘one-child policy’ and the coercion of health care workers. [Full text]

Hospital Restricts Nurses’ Freedom of Conscience

Markham-Stoufville, Ontario, Canada

David Dooley

If the province can spend millions of dollars setting up abortion clinics, Stephens said, it can well afford to hire nurses prepared to take part in abortions, rather than forcing others to go against their consciences. . . . And if hospitals pride themselves on being responsive to the community, this one should make plain how the recent decision was made and why the nurses are under such compulsion.

In a column in the May issue of Thornhill Month, John Stephens asked, “Must it be a matter of either job or conscience?” Until now, he wrote, the Birthplace Unit at the Markham-Stoufville Hospital has been used as the name implies. Now, nurses in the unit who abhor abortions are being told either to assist at these procedures or accept transfer to another department. “For nurses who have developed great skill at the birthing process,” Stephens pointed out, “this means giving up the job they love, and losing the opportunity to practise their expertise. In other circles, this would be called wrongful dismissal.” [Full text]

Sweeney Defends Firings

Transition house workers fired, denied benefits for ‘misconduct’

North Bay, Ontario, Canada

Frank M. Kennedy

The implication of the Minister’s defence is clear. Government-funded  “independent” social agencies, such as homes for battered women, may freely adopt a pro-abortion policy and then dismiss pro-life employees.

The Honourable John Sweeney, Ontario Minister of Community and Social Services, recently defended the dismissal of three pro-life staff workers at the Nipissing Transition House, a home for battered women in North Bay, for refusing to go along with the pro-abortion policy of the board.

Employees fired

Lorainne Carbonneau, married and the mother of three children, was fired on December 23 of last year [after] five years as a full time worker and, at one time, the assistant co-ordinator. She was fired because she would not counsel women for abortions or refer them to any pro-abortion counsellor working at the Nipissing Transition House.

One week later, two others were let go. Carol Baillargeon, a child care worker, and Rae desBlois, a household manager, were both fired over the phone one week after Christmas, also because of their refusal to refer for abortions. There was no other criticism of their employment records. [Full Text]