Attack on Conscience... again

The CBC Edmonton website had a random article today about a pro-life doctor who refuses to provide referrals for abortion. Dr. Johnston was commenting on the upcoming review of standards by the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta, where they may require physicians to refer a patient to an abortion center if the patient asks. This would essentially make it illegal for a doctor (myself included) to use our moral judgment in advising and treating our patients. And a brief reading of the comments shows most people do not understand the nature of medicine or the nature of abortion.

Practicing medicine is a moral activity. We, as physicians, recommend to our patients what they ought to do with their bodies/health. It is then up to the patient to proceed. As such, we must use our clinical judgment, but also our moral judgment in recommending what we feel is best for our patients. If we cannot do this, then the autonomy of the doctor is hampered and we become simply automatons of the system. Just because a law is in place does not make it right. And just because a patient demands for a procedure does not make it right, either. Particularly when there are so many negative sequelae to that procedure. See Abort73.com for excellent overviews of the abortion topic.

A fitting quote from Theodore Dalrymple in his book, "Life at the Bottom":

If the doctor has a duty to relieve the suffering of his patients, he must have some idea where that suffering comes from, and this involves the retention of judgment, including moral judgment. And if, as far as he can tell in good faith, the misery of his patients derives from the way they live, he has a duty to tell them so - which often involves a more or less explicit condemnation of their way of life as completely incompatible with a satisfying existence. By avoiding the issue, the doctor is not being kind to his patients; he is being cowardly. Moreover, by refusing to place the onus on the patients to improve their lot, he is likely to mislead them into supposing that he has some purely technical or pharmacological answer to their problems, thus helping to perpetuate them.