Local doc claims halting conscience rights bill leaves physicians vulnerable
By GILLIAN SLADE on November 29, 2019.
gslade@medicinehatnews.com@MHNGillianSlade Halting Bill 207 in the legislature has silenced those who felt it was a veiled attempt to erode access to abortions but one local doctor is disappointed there will be no protection for physicians. Dr. Gerry Prince says many physicians feel Bill 207 is necessary and “perhaps critical to preserving the diversity of values in our physician supply, especially in our smaller and rural areas.” He says the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta provides a degree of protection for physicians who abstain from certain forms of care – based on their personal or religious beliefs – but there are other detrimental effects. Prince says this is particularly true of physicians practising in smaller centres where there may not be enough doctors to step in and do abortions or medical assistance in dying if a physician prefers to not be involved. “There is real fear among physicians and staff in these smaller centres that if such services become mandated either by government or by public pressure, that their individual ability to practice would be impacted,” said Prince. “Without protection for rights of conscience, there is an unfair bias that starts being applied in a variety of ways.” He says there is the potential for a hospital to then only recruit physicians who are willing to provide these services. “Those who decline participating know that they will eventually have difficulty competing for positions, operating room time, etc,” said Prince. “Initially they may just lose hours and shifts, but they eventually risk losing their position entirely.” Bill 207 was a private member’s bill introduced Nov. 7 in the Alberta legislature by UCP MLA Dan Williams. It was called the Conscience Rights (Health Care Providers) Protection Act. Critics of Bill 207 said it contravened the rights of patients and would reduce abortion and other services. “The demand of patients for such procedures should not impinge on the Right of Conscience of providers who decline to participate on moral of religious grounds, even when exercising those rights many reduce access, especially in rural area,” said Prince. About a week ago the all-party Standing Committee on Private Bills and Private Members’ Public Bills voted 8-2 against moving forward with the bill in the legislature. 13-12
With all due respect, I cannot agree with Dr. Prince’s arguments. I have stated in the past that having a medical degree does not give one moral authority over a patient’s right to access abortion, or euthanasia. It is not about you, but rather the patient. In Alberta we believe in patient centred care. As a physician you have the responsibility to accommodate a legal request for abortion or euthanasia by referring the patient or directing them appropriately. As a private citizen you are within your rights to reject these procedures on moral grounds, however to do so within your medical practice is wrong. Once you enter the door to your office, you must leave your religious beliefs behind. You are there to provide medical care and advice not impose religious dogma.