World Medical Association

Project commentaries on WMA policy proposals

Introduction

The commentaries in this restricted directory have been prepared at the request of an Associate Member of the World Medical Association. They are intended for the use of WMA Associate and Constituent Members, and members of national physicians' associations that are Constituent WMA Members. Links to commentaries are available below.

Original WMA policy documents can be downloaded by WMA Associate and Constituent Members from the WMA website.

Revision of WMA Declaration of Oslo on Therapeutic Abortion (2006)

Commentary

Almost all members of the World Medical Association (WMA) were satisfied with a minor revision of the WMA's 2006 Declaration of Oslo on Therapeutic Abortion circulated for comment in 2016. Nonetheless, a WMA Working Group has proposed a new abortion policy (WGAP). A WMA Associate Member has asked the Protection of Conscience Project to review the policy. . . continue reading (complete text in English) or English - Précis.

Analytical Tables

Parallel comparisons of original and revisions, including recommendations by national associations (English)

Proposed Change to WMA Policies on Euthanasia and Physician Assisted Suicide (2015-2018)

Commentary

For decades, the World Medical Association (WMA) has held that euthanasia and physician assisted suicide are unethical and must be condemned by the medical profession, notwithstanding acceptance of the practices in some jurisdictions.

In 2015, the Canadian Medical Association (CMA) and Royal Dutch Medical Association (RDMA) argued that the World Medical Association should change this policy. The following year they submitted a proposal to the WMA Council setting out the changes they wished to see. . . continue reading (complete text in English)

Commentary Re: International Code of Medical Ethics revision

Paragraph 27: "Conscientious Objection"

This review . . . finds WG Para 27 anomalous in relation to medical practice because it ignores the role of conscience in medicine and adopts an inadequate and prejudicial analytical framework. WG Para 27 does not attempt or even suggest how to accommodate physician integrity and patient requests when they conflict. It is also anomalous in relation to existing WMA policy and related functionally interdependent paragraphs in the proposed ICME. . . . continue reading (complete text in English)