These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
Pubmed for Handhelds
PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS
Search MEDLINE/PubMed
Title: On being a certifying abortion consultant: an ethical dilemma. Author: Clarkson SE. Journal: N Z Med J; 1980 May 14; 91(659):346-7. PubMed ID: 6930023. Abstract: The medical profession was relieved when the Contraceptive, Sterilization and Abortion Act was passed in New Zealand in 1977, but it now appears that there are continuing problems with the implementation of the law. Most of the law's clauses are concerned with the practical aspects of the performance of abortions in New Zealand. Outlined in the law are requirements for licenses of hospitals, certifying consultants and operating surgeons, and the tasks of the supervising committee are specified. Thus, the medical profession accepted the impossible job of becoming the arbiter of morals of New Zealand society. There have been problems, since passage of the law, with inadequate numbers of certifying consultants being recruited, the resignation of the chair of the Abortion Supervisory Committee, a lack of resources to provide the required counseling services, and local variation in interpretations resulting in inconsistent treatment of abortion requests in different parts of the country. The basis of the problem is the fact that this law requires a moral rather than a medical decision to be made. Although at 1st glance the phrase serious risk to mental health would appear to be easily interpreted, this is not so. The morality of an act of abortion depends on the right afforded the fetus, and no society has as yet achieved a consensus on this. Thus, this must remain the conviction of each separate individual. Some guidance may come from medidal and legal advisers in this moral decision, but it is impossible to delegate personal moral decisions.[Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]