As a physician who has a special interest in history, I want to ask an important question. In asking this question, I want us all to put aside our personal beliefs about abortion, whatever they may be. Abortion is an issue about which honest, ethical people disagree. On one extreme, some people believe that it is always murder. On the other extreme, some people believe that personhood starts sometime after birth, and that abortion is acceptable throughout pregnancy. Let’s put that issue aside for a moment, and consider a question in the abstract.
Do you want your own doctor to have a standard of ethics that she will follow, even when the government has a different standard?
Before you answer, consider some historical facts. First, 65 years ago, Hitler’s doctors performed heinous medical experiments on individuals just because they were from different races than his preferred Aryans. Second, between 1932 and 1972, the United States Public Health Service did a study to learn what happened to untreated syphilis by deliberately withholding treatment from unsuspecting Black men in Tuskegee, Alabama. Third, in recent years, allegedly, doctors have been involved in the development of torture protocols used by the intelligence services.
Let’s consider some facts about today. Genocide is commonplace in many parts of the world. Involuntary abortion and sterilization are widely practiced in China. Several countries in Scandinavia now sanction euthanasia, and studies indicate that euthanasia is sometimes done without an explicit request.
Many doctors in this country commit fraud by doing unnecessary tests to make money or to protect themselves from lawsuits, without disclosing it to their patients. Some even do unnecessary surgery for the same reasons. This reflects their lack of an ethical conscience.
So if your doctor has a conscience, and happens to believe that abortion is murder, do you really want to make her violate her conscience? Do you want her to leave medicine altogether? Or do you want to encourage her to hold to standards that are independent of her own self-interest, and independent of whatever the government tells her is legal? If she stays in medicine, perhaps she will be the one to blow the whistle when someone is crossing a different line.
Let’s also separate this issue from one implied in the National Organization of Women website article. This is not just an issue driven by Bush and the religious right. There is a major shortage of doctors in this country right now, particularly in primary care. Many of those who are filling that shortage are from other countries, including Muslim countries. These individuals do not believe that abortion is acceptable. If we drive these individuals out of medicine, there will be a much bigger problem with access.
Existing laws, and existing medical ethical guidelines, already protect the rights of HIV patients and transgender individuals to receive healthcare. In reality, these new regulations simply clarify existing protections of rights of conscience that are already on the books. Read the HHS press release at http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2008pres/12/20081218a.html. That article also contains a link to the actual rule.
Over the past several years, we have seen greater polarization in our country. I believe that there needs to be more respect for those who have different views from our own. Strident statements by those on both sides of the abortion debate have generated more heat than light. I believe that the NOW article does the same thing. I have no doubt that there will be plenty of abortion providers with or without these new regulations. I also believe that we should not encourage people to violate their consciences, even if their standards are different from our own.
So how do you answer the question: Do you want your own doctor to have a standard of ethics that she will follow, even when the government has a different standard?
Comment Reply
As a physician who has a special interest in history, I want to ask an important question. In asking this question, I want us all to put aside our personal beliefs about abortion, whatever they may be. Abortion is an issue about which honest, ethical people disagree. On one extreme, some people believe that it is always murder. On the other extreme, some people believe that personhood starts sometime after birth, and that abortion is acceptable throughout pregnancy. Let’s put that issue aside for a moment, and consider a question in the abstract.
Do you want your own doctor to have a standard of ethics that she will follow, even when the government has a different standard?
Before you answer, consider some historical facts. First, 65 years ago, Hitler’s doctors performed heinous medical experiments on individuals just because they were from different races than his preferred Aryans. Second, between 1932 and 1972, the United States Public Health Service did a study to learn what happened to untreated syphilis by deliberately withholding treatment from unsuspecting Black men in Tuskegee, Alabama. Third, in recent years, allegedly, doctors have been involved in the development of torture protocols used by the intelligence services.
Let’s consider some facts about today. Genocide is commonplace in many parts of the world. Involuntary abortion and sterilization are widely practiced in China. Several countries in Scandinavia now sanction euthanasia, and studies indicate that euthanasia is sometimes done without an explicit request.
Many doctors in this country commit fraud by doing unnecessary tests to make money or to protect themselves from lawsuits, without disclosing it to their patients. Some even do unnecessary surgery for the same reasons. This reflects their lack of an ethical conscience.
So if your doctor has a conscience, and happens to believe that abortion is murder, do you really want to make her violate her conscience? Do you want her to leave medicine altogether? Or do you want to encourage her to hold to standards that are independent of her own self-interest, and independent of whatever the government tells her is legal? If she stays in medicine, perhaps she will be the one to blow the whistle when someone is crossing a different line.
Let’s also separate this issue from one implied in the National Organization of Women website article. This is not just an issue driven by Bush and the religious right. There is a major shortage of doctors in this country right now, particularly in primary care. Many of those who are filling that shortage are from other countries, including Muslim countries. These individuals do not believe that abortion is acceptable. If we drive these individuals out of medicine, there will be a much bigger problem with access.
Existing laws, and existing medical ethical guidelines, already protect the rights of HIV patients and transgender individuals to receive healthcare. In reality, these new regulations simply clarify existing protections of rights of conscience that are already on the books. Read the HHS press release at http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2008pres/12/20081218a.html. That article also contains a link to the actual rule.
Over the past several years, we have seen greater polarization in our country. I believe that there needs to be more respect for those who have different views from our own. Strident statements by those on both sides of the abortion debate have generated more heat than light. I believe that the NOW article does the same thing. I have no doubt that there will be plenty of abortion providers with or without these new regulations. I also believe that we should not encourage people to violate their consciences, even if their standards are different from our own.
So how do you answer the question: Do you want your own doctor to have a standard of ethics that she will follow, even when the government has a different standard?
December 22, 2008 - 4:34pmThis Comment
Reply