In a long-awaited report, a panel appointed by the Irish government to study the operation of the abortion law in Ireland has stated the government is obliged to provide guidelines that establish how women in Ireland can obtain abortions consistent with Irish law. It recommends that a physician who objects to abortion for reasons of conscience should be forced to facilitate the procedure by referring a patient to a willing colleague, and to provide an abortion “when the risk of death is imminent and inevitable.” The report is not clear on the extent to which conscientious objection might be allowed to other health care workers. [Report, p. 42, 6.9]
Tag: physicians
Polish law and conduct of Polish physicians, clergy, activists and authorities leads to adverse judgement
The European Court of Human Rights has issued a judgement adverse to freedom of conscience and ordered Poland to pay two complainants, a mother and daughter, a total of 61,000 Euros in damages and costs. Subject to the possibility that the English translation of the judgement is faulty, the use of the term “anti-choice activist” by the judges brings their impartiality into question. However, the facts of the case outlined in the judgement suggest that the conduct of Polish health care personnel, anti-abortion activists, clergy and state authorities effectively guaranteed an adverse outcome.
A 14 year old girl, P. supported by her mother, S., sought an abortion for a pregnancy alleged to have been the result of a rape. While she obtained the necessary prosecutor’s certificate for the procedure, mother and daughter received contradictory information from two public hospitals in Lublin. Further, health care personnel clearly violated principles of patient confidentiality and informed consent in an effort to dissuade the girl from having an abortion. These violations included clearly coercive and manipulative tactics. P and S experienced
- the intervention of a priest and anti-abortion activists, unsolicited and unwanted,
- importuning by anti-abortion activists that included confrontations in public,
- national media attention, including a press release issued by a hospital concerning P,
- detention and six hours of questioning by the police,
- apprehension of the girl by state authorities, apparently for the express purpose of preventing the abortion,
- posting on internet by the Catholic News Agency of the girl’s travel to Gdansk for an abortion,
- the filing of criminal charges against the girl for having had unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor (i.e., the rape that resulted in pregnancy)
While the court found that objecting physicians had a legal obligation to refer patients for abortion, the source of that legal obligation was Polish law. Article 39 of Poland’s Doctor and Dentist Professions Act imposes a legal obligation of referral. The imposition is objectionable in principle, but the European Court of Human Rights can hardly be criticized for applying Polish law to Polish citizens.
American Academy of Family Physicians supports freedom of conscience
The American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) passed a resolution at a meeting in Philadelphia supporting freedom of conscience for physicians. Resolution 507 (Physician Conscience Protection Rights) was proposed by the Florida chapter as a result of concerns about freedom of conscience generated by federal health care reforms. The Congress of Delegates agreed that hysicians should be able to practise in accordance with their conscientious convictions, “without resulting in loss of licensure or significant financial penalty.” Current policy of the organization is that physicians who are “uncomfortable” providing contraception should refer patients to colleagues willing to provide “the education and/or service.” [MedPage Today]
Project Submission to the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario
Re: Physicians and the Ontario Human Rights Code
(11 September, 2008)
- Background | The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario is the regulatory and licensing authority for physicians and surgeons practising in Ontario. The Ontario Human Rights Commission responded to a draft policy of the College by recommending that the exercise of freedom of conscience by physicians be restricted. The College, in response, released a draft policy Physicians and the Ontario Human Rights Code, indicating that Ontario physicians would be expected to sacrifice their freedom of conscience to meet the demands of their patients and avoid prosecution by Ontario’s human rights apparatus. Project Submission
Testimony of pharmacist re: Wisconsin Senate Bill 21
Before the Senate Labour Committee
Wisconsin
The physician was adamant that I had to fill whatever he prescribed, even though I explained my conscience would not allow me to do that. He threatened that my supervisor would find out about this, and I feared that my job could be in jeopardy. I was harassed for my beliefs, and my dignity as a person was attacked.
Thank you for being here to listen to my testimony in support of SB 21. As a pharmacist licensed in the state of WI, I have experienced first hand the fear of being fired for my religious, moral, or ethical beliefs, and realize how important this bill is for the future of pharmacy. First let me explain the current state of the pharmacy profession.
As you may know, there is a shortage of health care workers. Pharmacists, especially, are in very high demand. If pharmacists are being fired or not allowed equal opportunities because they object to dispensing medications that cause abortions or death of an individual person, we are doing society and our great State of Wisconsin an injustice. [Full text]