Letter re- Fair Labelling Informed Consent Act

Home

Protection of Conscience Project
Project Archives

Traduire à français Tradurre all'italiano Traduzca al español Traduza a português Übersetzen Sie zu Deutsch Oversett til Norsk

Protection of
Conscience
Project
www.consciencelaws.org

Related Links
Proposed bill

ADVISORY BOARD
^{Janet Ajzenstat, B.A.,M.A. Ph.d

Associate Professor,

Dept. of Political Science,

McMaster University,

Hamilton, Ontario, Canada}

^{Dr. Shahid Athar, M.D.

Clinical Associate Professor

of Medicine & Endocrinology,

Indiana School of Medicine,

Indianapolis, Indiana, U.S.A}...

^{J. Budziszewski, Ph.d

Professor,
Departments of

Government & Philosophy,

University of Texas,

Austin, Texas, U.S.A.}

^{Dr. John Fleming,

B.A., Th.L (Hons), Ph.d

Director, Southern Cross

Bioethics Institute,

Adelaide, Australia}

^{Dr. Henk Jochemsen, Ph.D

Director, Lindeboom Institute,

Center for Medical Ethics

Amsterdam, Netherlands}

^{David Novak,

AB, MHL, Ph.d

Chair of Jewish Studies,

University of Toronto,

Toronto, Ontario, Canada}

^{Lynn D. Wardle, J.D.

Professor of Law,

J. Reuben Clark Law School,

Brigham Young University,

Salt Lake City, Utah, U.S.A.}

PROJECT TEAM
^{Sean Murphy

Administrator}

^{Michael Markwick

Human Rights Specialist}

15 December, 2003

Ms. Debi Vinnedge, Director
Children of God for Life,
2130 Catalina Drive,
Florida 33764
USA

Dear Ms. Vinnedge:

This letter is in response to your e-mail of 4 December, 2003, concerning the proposal to enact legislation to require ‘truth in labelling’ of pharmaceutical products.

I understand that the legislation you have in mind is similar to that enacted recently in Australia, which requires full disclosure of the origin of any products derived from human embryos. Such labelling would benefit patients and health care professionals who, for reasons of conscience, want to avoid the use of such products.

Many people are familiar with a variety of consumer products that are labelled to identify them as ‘organic’, as having been produced by environmentally friendly practices, or as not having been produced by mistreatment of animals. Your proposal would quite sensibly apply this well-established practice to products derived from morally controversial techniques or procedures.

This a modest proposal that would not burden researchers, pharmaceutical companies, health care professionals or patients. It is fully consistent with the principle of informed consent and with respect for freedom of conscience in a pluralistic society. The Protection of Conscience Project supports it in principle, and we hope that your efforts to secure appropriate legislation will be successful.

Sincerely,

(Sean Murphy)
Administrator

Finding Aid