Letter to the Editor
- Canadian Medical Association Journal

Philip G. Ney, MD, MA, FRCPC, RPsych

© July 2006

Re: "Abortion: ensuring access"

Before definitively forming an opinion on the editorial "Abortion: ensuring access" by Rodgers and Downie, I would like to ask them a few questions;

  1. Why is abortion considered a "key component" to women's health?
  2. What is the scientific evidence that abortion is good and/or essential for women?
  3. How can abortion be a "constitutionally protected right" for women, and at the same time, the practice of abortion be "regulated like any other medical procedure"?
  4. If abortion is regulated like any other medical procedure, why are they complaining that women "require referrals"?
  5. Do doctors have a dual obligation to treat and to warn where the evidence is weighty enough, as in smoking cigarettes?
  6. How does dispensing of the Morning After Pill without prescription or examination jibe with "regulated like any other medical procedure"?
  7. I note that Rogers and Downie think the physicians "must" or "should do" on 9 occasions. How would members of the legal profession feel about physicians telling the legal profession how to conduct their affairs?
  8. If the medical profession is a self regulating, autonomous body which practices evidence-based medicine, why does not the judiciary or the legislators insist medical scientists do as many proper scientific evaluations as necessary on the efficacy and safety of abortions?
  9. Would they agree that the burden of proof for any medical procedure lies with those who perform, refer to or recommend that procedure, to show beyond reasonable doubt its safety and efficacy?
  10. Can they explain why this should not apply to abortion?

 

Sincerely,

Dr. Philip Ney