News Commentary 2001-2011
News commentary for 1999, 2000 and 2012 to the present is
available on the
Conscience Clauses Needed Worldwide for Medical Professionals
. . . Progressives likely cheer erosions of conscience protections for health
care providers because emergency contraception, abortion and assisted
suicide are issues they champion. But I want to look farther into the future
to see how a lack of conscience clauses will affect the medical profession.
Obama Administration Rejects Conscience Protections
An issue of paramount importance for medical professionals is the
protection of their right to conscience-their freedom to refuse or decline
to do practices they oppose on religious or moral grounds. A February
decision by the Obama administration, however, sweeps aside conscience
protections instituted under President Bush. . .
Obama Administration Guts Healthcare Conscience Regulation
On February 18 the Obama administration gutted the only federal
regulation protecting conscientious healthcare professionals from
discrimination. . .
Conscience Protection at Risk
In October, at a central European meeting with pro-life
colleagues, I learned that in a few days there was going to be a
vote in the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe
concerning rights of conscience. The vote was on the "McCafferty
Report," which strongly recommended significant restrictions on
rights of conscience. . .
Protect conscience clause
Should healthcare providers be required to engage in
medical procedures, such as abortions, that violate their
individual moral or religious convictions? . . .
Charleston Baptist letter to
Washington Pharmaceutical Board
Denouncing Removal of
Right of Conscience Provision
The Conscience of the Chemists
The General Pharmaceutical Council, shortly to
take over the regulation of pharmacists, has
issued a revised code of conduct that permits pharmacists to refuse the
sale of the contraceptive and morning-after pills to customers . . .
Unchecked government health care endangers conscience
Cathy DeCarlo of Brooklyn and her family followed the health reform
debate more closely than some others might have. Cathy is Catholic and
a nurse at Mount Sinai Hospital in New York. Less than a year ago, the federally-funded hospital forced
her to assist in a 22-week dismemberment abortion . . .
Disdains Scott Brown's conscience
Reading James Madison's "Memorial and
Remonstrance" last week, I was struck by how timely it is after 225 years. . . Madison's principle - that we should not force people with conscientious
objections to cooperate in practices they view as evil - has taken a beating in
the current Senate campaign. . .
Vellacott weighs in on Abortion
The controversy surrounding the availability of
abortion in Saskatoon appears to have begun with a
complaint to the effect that Saskatoon physicians are
generally unwilling to perform the procedure after 12
weeks gestation. . .
The right not to be pushed around by government
Last year, Ontario's College of Physicians and Surgeons
came close to implementing a policy that would have made
it "unethical" for doctors to decline, as a matter of
conscience, to perform controversial medical procedures
on otherwise healthy patients. . .
Personal conscience strengthens law
. . .legal protections alone are insufficient to
motivate an individual to buck an establishment that has
gone AWOL ethically. . .
Pharmacists live in fear
. . .It was in Toronto that a colleague suggested I
leave my beliefs at the door and in Vancouver that a
pharmacy manager warned me about "imposing my morality"
. . .
The Next Moral Quagmire: Conscience
Based on my informed moral and religious conscience, I am a
doctor who refuses to refer for abortions. I refuse to
co-operate with intrinsic wrongness. . .
Pro-choice - unless you're a doctor
One of our most celebrated liberties in America is the freedom of
conscience, or the freedom to hold and act upon conscientious judgments.
Why is there no choice for pro-lifers?
What is going on in America, the land of the free? It's
not pretty; it's not even practical; and it smacks strongly of
anti-Catholic bigotry. . .
Wrong to rescind
Dr. Leslie Chorun was forced to resign from her residency program
because she refused to refer women for abortions, believing it was below
the standard of care for physicians. Dr. Sandy Christiansen was reamed
out in front of her team of residents and medical students for not
wanting to be involved in her patient's late-term abortion because of
her Christian beliefs. . .
Time to provide conscience protections for pharmacists
Conscience clauses provide real choice
. . .Thomas Jefferson said that no provision in the
Constitution "ought to be dearer to man than that which protects the rights
of conscience against the enterprises of civil authority." . . .
Pro-choice. Pro-choice. Pro-choice. We get a little tired
of hearing that moniker for the abortion-rights movement, since it isn't
very accurate. . .
week, what the Washington Post characterized as a "terse posting
on a federal Web site" set the stage for a debate on just how seriously
our society takes freedom of conscience. . .
Cardinal George Urges Catholics to Tell Administration: Keep Conscience
Protections for Health Care Workers
. . .I'd like to take a moment to speak about two
principles or ideas that have been basic to life in our country:
religious liberty and the freedom of personal conscience.
Regulation keeps abortion a 'choice'
The Blade's Jan. 6 editorial, "Health-care mischief" unwisely attacks a modest
new federal agency regulation that would finally implement 35 years of First
Amendment and civil rights protections . . .
The campaign against conscience rights
American healthcare workers who oppose abortion and
euthanasia could be squeezed out of their jobs. . .
A matter of conscience
. . . few Americans realize that
abortion-related mandates are also threatening to U.S. health care
professionals who follow medical standards such as the Hippocratic Oath. . .
Don't doctors deserve a choice on abortion?
The acerbic editorial "Bush rules" (Nov. 11) ironically
accuses the Bush administration of attacking "personal rights" and then
lambastes the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services for proposing
a regulation to protect the civil rights of health care professionals. .
New-look Inquisitions want to call doctors in for a little chat
This summer, Canada's well-known doctor shortage almost
got worse. A portion of doctors in Canada's largest province started
scouting for jobs elsewhere, expecting that Ontario would soon require
them to violate their conscience. . .
Proposed rule would protect doctors from discrimination
The uproar over a modest proposal by the Department of
Health and Human Services (HHS) reveals a widening culture chasm in
healthcare, created by disparate views of medical ethics and civil
rights. . .
"Human Rights" vs. Basic Freedoms
A timely intervention has prevented the cancer from metastasizing, but
aggressive treatment is still needed. The diagnosis is by now well known:
From their privileged place within the body politic, Canada's various
human rights commissions have gone from legitimately fighting
discrimination to attacking Canadian liberties. . .
Letter to the Editor, Vancouver Sun
Re: "Doctors have a duty of care notwithstanding their religious
Your editorial ("Doctors
have a duty of care notwithstanding their religious beliefs,"
Vancouver Sun, 17 September, 2008) refers to a doctor's "duty of
care," but that is not what is at issue in Ontario. The draft Ontario
College of Physicians policy is not about patients "receiving adequate
treatment." It is about "accessing services," as one might access automotive
repair . . .
Check your Ethics
While the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO) has been in
the spotlight for its proposal to restrict doctors' freedom of conscience,
the source of the CPSO's attacks on doctors has been revealed to be the
Ontario Human Rights Commission. And this bodes badly not just for Ontario
doctors, but for the future freedoms of all working Ontarians. . .
Shoving abortion down doctors' throats
Time was, even as abortion became widely available, one's beliefs around
the morality of the practice were one's own business. Today,
unconditional support for unfettered access to abortion seems to be the
litmus test of an individual's or an institution's moral standing within
the community. . .
Rules let care workers practice medical ethics
Laura Berman's Aug. 26 column, "Keep the choice in hands
of patients," mischaracterizes a conscience-protecting regulation
recently proposed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services as
somehow pitting "health care workers with strong religious and moral
beliefs against women needing care." . . .
Re: Sept. 8 editorial "Leavitt should drop proposed health care rule."
. . . The regulation in no way prohibits access to either
contraception or abortion. The regulation merely implements 35 years of
civil rights laws to protect health care professionals from
discrimination . . .
Moral Safeguards for Patients, Too
The misunderstanding expressed in the Aug. 26 letter,
"Health Care's Conscientious Objectors," illustrates the need for the
conscience-protecting regulation recently proposed by the Department of
Health and Human Services. . .
Conscience and coercion
. . . An intolerant approach to individual conscience is
fomenting a crisis of access in health care, particularly in obstetrics
and gynecology, where doctors and medical students are leaving for fear
of reprisals or coercion to do abortions. . .
Abortion Article Was Incorrect
Shirley Kirkwood's recent Open Forum wrongly suggests
that a regulation proposed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services is somehow aimed at blocking contraception use ("Abortion Is A
Religious Right," Aug. 21). . .
The sheer arrogance of human rights commissions will be their downfall:
their conviction that they have a superior understanding of rights compared
to anyone else and that once they have pronounced how rights shall be
interpreted, the rest of us should fall in lockstep with smiles on our faces
and cheery tunes on our tongues, content that our intellectual betters have
shown us the error of our ways and revealed the path to true enlightenment.
Doctors must always have right to follow
Some 2,500 years ago, doctors were both healers and killers. . . .That ended
in 400 BC, when a Greek physician named Hippocrates decided that patients
deserved better and wrote an oath to affirm the sanctity of life and the
doctor's duty to protect it. . . .
Letter to the Editor, National Post 16 August, 2008 (Not published)
. . . The crux of this question is clearly what we mean by a medical
treatment someone "requires", and who decides that the person "requires" it.
The doctor? The patient? The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario?
. . .
Dignity is key, says pro-life doctor
Unfortunately, letter-writer Greg Hart continues to fail to see
my point. This is about religious beliefs against science. It is
about conscience and the right of physicians not to engage in
harmful practices. . . .
Forcing our doctors' hands
One of the best-known aid organizations in the world is Medecins Sans
Frontieres -- Doctors Without Borders. It may soon be joined by a similar
group operating within Canada's largest province -- Medecins Sans Conscience
-- Doctors Without Consciences. . .
Letter to the Editor, Seattle Post Intelligencer
that his op-ed column will "bring down the wrath of those who see themselves as
ordained guardians of our morals," Dan Thomasson proceeds to angrily moralize
about pharmacists who withdraw from a prescription request in rare cases when
they deem the prescription harmful to patients or deadly to developing babies
. . .
Protecting the Consciences of OB/GYN's
A recent issue of the Journal of Clinical Ethics
published a series of articles addressing the question, to what
extent should the consciences of obstetrician-gynecologists (ob/gyns)
be protected? The importance of the question lay in the fact
that ob/gyns may receive requests to perform controversial
sexual or reproductive procedures. . .
Conscience, Plan B: More than a nicety
John Rinke, a doctor opposed to abortion, finds he must make an
unpopular argument if he wants to keep his job. This is unfortunate.
The argument is about a proposed state law saying that all hospitals must
immediately give any rape victim who asks for it emergency contraception -
in practice, the drug called Plan B. The law makes no exceptions for those
hospital employees who think this is wrong. . .
Clear-conscience health reform.
rising costs, declining quality, administrative hassles, and coverage
gaps aren't reasons enough to reform American health care, here's one
more: conscience concerns. . .
PRO-CON: Can pharmacists refuse to handle prescriptions for moral reasons?
Freedom means freedom for everyone. In a free society, customers
shouldn't be forbidden by law from purchasing products except in very
restricted circumstances. And in a free society, proprietors and employers
shouldn't be forced to sell any particular product. . .
Deadly Prescription for Canadian Doctors
U.S. President Dwight Eisenhower once observed that in free countries, "the
agent may never become the master." If human rights and freedoms are to
flourish, he said, "government must operate with its powers sharply defined
and limited by the governed." Presumably that would apply to the
Canadian Medical Association as well, which, as an agent for Canada's
physicians, is now under pressure to remove doctors' freedom of conscience
on abortion . . .
Right to Refuse to Participate in Abortions:
Comment on the Weldon Amendment
If some have their way, you will either have to amputate your
conscience or get out of healthcare. They see doctors as vending machines for
every and all legal health interventions. Put in your money; get your therapy. .
Doctors Sued for Refusing Insemination on
Conscience Grounds: Comment
on Benitez v. North Coast Women's Care Med Grp
. . . If the plaintiff prevails, it will be a severe blow to the rights of
all physicians who seek to follow their conscience. . .
Jiminy Cricket Need Not Apply
Around the country, state legislatures are threatening to remove
conscience clauses that have allowed religious institutions as well as
individuals to be exempt from providing services they find objectionable on
religious and moral grounds. Conscientious objection to military service has a
long history in the United States and other countries. Lately, the debate has
heated up in the medical arena as well . . .
Free speech for pharmacists
The editorial, "Pushing back on 'morning-after' access" wrongly casts an
unconscionable decision by the Oregon Board of Pharmacy as a valiant attempt to
"push back against efforts to restrict access to the 'morning-after pill.'"
Guided By Conscience
. . . Faith and values, and their implications, are factors in emergency
rooms, family practices, residency programs, hospital bioethics committees
and operating rooms in the Roanoke and New River valleys.
Why We Need a Conscience Clause
Williams spent five years working as a pharmacist at a Target store in
St. Louis. During that time, Target accommodated Williams's desire not
to take part in dispensing the morning-after pill-the drug that causes
the abortion of an embryonic human being. But then Planned Parenthood
threatened to boycott the Target chain over Williams's employment-so
Target fired her. . .
Project Letter to the Editor, Hartford Courant
Frances Kissling, who, for political purposes, purports to have
some association with the Catholic Church, poses the rhetorical question,
"Does Church doctrine trump rape victims' needs?" (Hartford Courant,
19 March, 2006). The title of her column illustrates the old problem of
getting the wrong answers by asking the wrong questions. . .
Heavy-handed in Massachusetts
An imperious Massachusetts state pharmacy board dropped a bomb on
private enterprise and individuals rights this week, ordering Wal-Mart
to stock the controversial "morning-after pill" ("Wal-Mart to sell
morning-after pill," Nation/Politics, Tuesday) . . .
CMA in Washington Post on Conscience Rights
. . .
CMDA has spoken out concerning the right of conscience as Christian
healthcare professionals come under increasing attack from groups trying to
force them to violate their beliefs. It is ironic that those who march under
the banner of "choice" and "rights" are eager to trample on the civil
liberties of others. . .
Rights of Conscience - Exactly Whose Conscience Wins?
If you were to listen to the liberal establishment, you would think there
was a terrible abuse of human rights happening here in the US . . .
Rights of Conscience
Have you noticed the progression of demands from groups that society accept
morally objectionable practices? Whether it is abortion on demand or the
church allowing homosexual marriage, first there is a demand for tolerance.
Once a practice is tolerated, the next demand is for acceptance without
reservation. . .
Rights of Conscience
Some pharmacists in Illinois may soon have to decide between their job and
their conscience. Recently, Governor Rod Blagojevich issued an executive
order requiring pharmacists to dispense all legally written prescriptions,
including those for the morning-after pill. . .
Protect pro-life druggists
Public policy debates ignited by special interest groups often lend
more heat than light to issues. So it is with "Pharmacists vs. the
Pill," a battle started by abortion-rights advocates. .
People without Conscience
. . .The Hyde-Weldon Conscience Protection Amendment was approved as part
of Congress's final omnibus funding bill. It forbids federal agencies, and
state and local governments receiving federal funds, to discriminate
against health care providers who choose not to participate in abortions.
Letter to the Editor, Canadian Pharmaceutical Journal (Alarcon)
. . . you write that tolerance
is a bedrock value of our democracy and that it goes both ways; yet in the
next paragraph you contradict yourself by stating that the onus is on the
health professional to respect the religious beliefs of the patient, and
not the other way around. . .
Letter to the Editor, Canadian Pharmaceutical Journal (Bizecki)
The editorial written in
October's issue was an excellent demonstration of the discriminatory
harassment to which conscientious objectors are subjected . . .
What about doctors' right to choose?
Should a private health care
provider or hospital be forced to perform abortions, even if he, she or it
believes abortions are unethical?
Project letter to the editor, Canadian Pharmaceutical Journal
Polly Thompson asserts that religious tolerance is "a
bedrock value of our democracy, and it goes both ways," but then claims
that "the onus is on the health professional to respect the religious
beliefs of the patient, not the other way around," a most peculiar form of
tolerant reciprocity. . .
Professionals Deserve Conscience Protection on Abortion
The House of Representatives recently voted to prohibit
government authorities from requiring any health care professional or
institution to perform or pay for abortions. Our Founding Fathers obviously would applaud this
protection of individual liberties and conscience. Yet when D.C. officials faced
this hot brewing battle a few years ago, they pushed free speech and freedom of
religion aside and nearly plunged the capital into a health care crisis . . .
Planned Parenthood and "Anti-Choice" Rhetoric
(Project response to "Planned Parenthood Targets 'Anti-choice' Docs"
[Calgary Herald] 30 August 2004)
In 1999, citing allegations by un-named "individuals," a
Councillor of the Alberta College of Physicians and Surgeons claimed that
some physicians who were not "supportive" of women seeking abortions were
"rude and bullying to patients." Canadian Physicians for Life rebuked the
Councillor for relying upon "polemical hearsay" and demanded that the
College substantiate the allegation . . .
Project Letter to the Editor, National Post (Canada) 22 May, 2004
Your report about plans to make the morning-after pill
available without prescription claimed that pharmacists who refuse to
dispense it for reasons of conscience are expected to refer for the drug
("'Abortion pill' rules loosened: Morning-after tablet to be available
without a prescription," National Post, 19 May 2004). This is an
oversimplification . . .
Project letter to the Editor, Western Standard Magazine (Alberta, Canada) 14 May, 2004
Should doctors be forced to abandon their faith? by Terry O'Neill
draws attention to the problem of freedom of conscience in health care. .
Project Letter to the Editor,
Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology (Canada) 5 April, 2004
Rebecca J. Cook and Bernard M. Dickens state, "Physicians who feel
entitled to subordinate their patient's desire for well-being to
the service of their own personal morality or conscience should not
practise clinical medicine" (Emphasis added). The statement is
unsupported by their own legal references, and it has little to recommend
it as an ordering principle in the practice of medicine . . .
Project Letter to the Editor, Calgary Herald (Alberta, Canada) 12
While I am pleased to see that Laura Wershler is willing to accommodate
freedom of conscience among health care workers, I must correct some
misleading statements included in her article ("The morning after:
Pro-life agenda misrepresents the emergency contraceptive pill, or ECP",Calgary
Herald, 13 February, 2004) . . .
When Rights Collide
A few years ago, a customer asked Co-op pharmacist Maria Bizecki to fill a prescription for an abortion drug. For Bizecki, a Roman
Catholic and active pro-lifer, this was akin to being invited to become an accessory to murder. She declined.
It was a risky stand against the prevailing view of pharmaceutical professional associations, and employers retailing drugs. Yet, ultimately it led to a small step forward for Albertans' religious
freedom. . .
Project Letter to the Editor,
Cybercast News Service (USA)
Some opponents of freedom of conscience for Wisconsin
pharmacists justify their coercive views with the claim that rural
residents may be deprived of certain drugs if the only pharmacist in town
has moral objections to dispensing them. (Pharmacist Conscience Bill
Pushed in Wisconsin, February 28, 2003). . .
Project Letter to the Editor,
The Medical Post (Canada)
I am writing to correct an error in a report published in July in The
Medical Post. ("Swiss vote in new law making abortion legal in first
trimester". 24 July, 2002, Vol. 28, No. 37). My response has been delayed
by the need to consult Swiss authorities and the Swiss Catholic Bishops'
Conference. . .
Project Letter to the Editor, Daily News (Halifax, N.S.)
This response to your article Bacon, eggs and peace of mind:
Pharmacists, Planned Parenthood push for prescription-free morning-after
pill (17 November, 2002) has been delayed by the need to consult the
Nova Scotia College of Pharmacists.
With respect to the 'morning-after-pill', your article attributed the
following quote to Kelly Grover of Planned Parenthood: "Nobody is forcing
pharmacists to prescribe this. There is a code of ethics that requires them
to refer patients." . . .
Letter to the Editor, New Brunswick/Saint John Telegraph Journal
Doctors at the hospital in Moncton have decided to perform only abortions
they believe necessary for maternal health, so that scarce health care
resources can be dedicated to reducing waiting lists for surgery. Dr.
Henry Morgentaler calls this "disgusting". He also accuses his colleagues
of unethical conduct because they appear to be imposing their religious or
moral views on patients. . .
It's still legal to oppose abortion, isn't it? You might think
that any piece of legislation with the word "non-discrimination" in it is
just about automatically headed for easy congressional passage. What
politician wants to be on record as being in favor of discrimination?
Well, it's just not so. At least if the issues involved are religion and
abortion . . .
A Doctor's Choice.
Dick Armey was the Majority Leader (Republican) in the
U.S. House of Representatives when the following opinion column was
written. Mr. Armey successfully argued for the passage of the
Non-Discrimination Act (ANDA).
The column first appeared in the
Washington Times on 25 September, 2002.
Tough Pill Bill to Swallow
Passage of New York's Equity in Prescription Insurance and Contraceptive
Coverage (EPICC) bill forces New York's fully insured health plans to
subsidize all FDA-approved contraceptive pills and devices. In addition to
violating religious liberty and an individual's right of conscience, this
law undermines parents by expanding government control of American
children's sexual and reproductive health . . .
"imposing morality" in Barrie? (Project response to CBC Op-Ed
piece, April, 2002)
In an editorial broadcast on CBC Radio on 7 March, 2002, Dr. Brian
Goldman criticized Dr. Frederick Ross of Winnipeg, Manitoba, and Dr.
Stephen Dawson of Barrie, Ontario. Dr. Ross had told his patients to
stop smoking or find another doctor, while Dr. Dawson had refused to
prescribe birth control pills or Viagra to single patients.
contraception a flawed choice
the first day of spring, a coalition of American national, state and local
organizations will take Walt Disney's Bambi's notion of "being
twitter pated" to a new level . . .
Hospitality: The Unborn and the ACLU
Few, if any, organizations in the world promote abortion as zealously
as the American Civil Liberties Union. Now it's training its guns on
hospitals . . .
Letter to the Editor, New Brunswick/Saint John Telegraph Journal
Dr. Monica Brewer's characterization of physician referral for morally
controversial purposes as a "black and white" issue is the
result of inadequate reflection.("MD's Morals Restricting Birth
Control Access," February 9, 2002) . . .
Letter to the Editor, National Post
A doctor caring for patients in four Ontario cities may be driven from the
profession, or from the country, because he refuses to practise medicine
in accordance with the policies of Planned Parenthood ("MD under fire
for denying birth control," National Post, 22 February, 2002).
Welcome to the world of single-issue ethics. . .
Letter to the Editor, The Barrie Examiner
Continuing attempts to suppress the freedom of conscience of health care
workers like Dr. Stephen Dawson ("Doctor's Faith Under
Scrutiny," The Barrie Examiner February 21, 2002) give the lie
to the claim, oft repeated by Canadian politicians, that protection of
conscience legislation is unnecessary . . .
Letter to the Editor (BC Medical Journal)
to the Editor, Telegraph Journal (New Brunswick, Canada)
The cover of your January/February 2002 edition highlighting Dr. Roey M.
Malleson's article on 'emergency contraception' was unexpected: a
brawny, half-naked, Aryan warrior, eyes glinting murderously from under
his horned helmet, wielding a copper IUD, crouched to spring and
slaughter. . .
The headline on the front
page, "MDs' morals restricting birth control access"
(Telegraph-Journal, Feb. 9) was eye-catching.
Editor (Globe and Mail)
Michael Valpy quotes Janet
Cooper to the effect that 4,600 prescriptions for the 'morning-after-pill'
in BC are believed to have prevented 300 pregnancies . . .Doing the math, one finds that only about 6% of these women might have
been pregnant . . .
Letter to the Editor (Pharmacy Practice)
Re: Ethics and Patient Care, in the June issue of Pharmacy Practice
fully agree with Frank Archer's premise that " a long time ago pharmacy
established itself as a patient-centred profession".
Project Letter to the Editor (Pharmacy Practice)
Far from illuminating fundamental ethical issues, Frank
Archer's preference for mantras like "recognized pharmacy
services" casts a shadow over discussion. (Ethics
Letter to the
Editor (The Ottawa Citizen)
It is both remarkable and
shameful that nurses like "Alice" must use pseudonyms when
commenting on freedom of conscience, something that the Canadian
Charter of Rights proclaims to be a "fundamental freedom" .
to the Editor (MS. Magazine)
still don't get it. How can those who stand for the "right of
women to make their own decisions" at the same time argue that a
doctor, nurse, or pharmacist should be legally coerced into performing an
act that violates her most deeply-held beliefs? . . .
Project Letter to
the Editor (Canadian Pharmaceutical Journal)
Further to our e-mail exchange of 24 May, 2001, I am writing to
thank you for your editorial response to my criticism of Frank Archer's
opinion piece in the Journal last year.
to the Editor (The Province)
Readers might be confused by Susan Martinuk's quote from the
College of Pharmacists about what the future may hold for the
profession: "preparation of drugs to assist voluntary or
involuntary suicide, cloning, genetic manipulation or even suicide"
. . .
Project Letter to the
An article about a bill in the Wisconsin legislature (Megan Mulholland, Conscience bill offers no easy answers,
30 April, 2001) concludes with the observation that it raises tough
questions but "no easy answers. . .
Editorial- (Canadian Pharmaceutical Journal)
in August, in the thick of our series on emergency contraception, Sean
Murphy, administrator of a group called the Protection of Conscience
Project, sent us a letter criticizing a column we published by Frank Archer,
a member of the BC College of Pharmacists ethics committee . . .
Hold that conscience: Some health laws would force
churches to betray their beliefs.
Here in New York, Cardinal Edward Egan had a little chat with Gov. George
Pataki last week about whether Roman Catholic institutions should be forced
to provide contraceptive services and the "morning after" pill for
their female employees. . .
Project Letter to the Editor (Pharmacy Practice)
Freedom of conscience and religion enjoy privileged status
in Canada and are "fundamental" goods guaranteed by the Charter of Rights, but
the Charter does not similarly guarantee professional or economic
self-interest . . .
to the Editor (Canadian Pharmaceutical Journal)
The January editorial ("Compromise") in the Canadian
Pharmaceutical Journal is a welcome invitation to reflect more deeply on the serious
obligation to accommodate freedom of conscience within the profession . .
to the Editor (The London Free Press)
Sharon Osvald’s op/ed piece (Can Workplace,
Conscience, Co-exist? 16 January,
2001) refers to a difference in belief about
conception. The controversy about the ‘morning after pill’ actually begins to
swirl around the definition of conception . . .
Workplace, Conscience Co-exist?
It's something most people will have to face at least once in their lives.
Whether it is being asked to work in a dangerous environment or operate a
vehicle that is not safe, it can be difficult to balance your convictions
and responsibilities at work without affecting your job. . .
Project Letter to the Editor (The Star
The Star Phoenix editorial in favour of pharmacists
dispensing the ‘morning after pill’ reflects some confusion about the
controversy surrounding the drug . . .
Update Report on Freedom of Conscience in Healthcare Delivery
Richard A. Watson, M.D. Co-Chairman, New Jersey Physicians' Resource Council;
Past President, Catholic Medical Association