Opinion
Conscience law enforcement protects those making a crucial moral decision
LETTER — Posted Nov. 24, 2008
Regarding "Activist veto of abortions will result if conscience laws enforced as proposed" (Letters, Oct. 20): The letter by Amesh Adalja, MD, of Butler, Pa., claiming Health and Human Services Secretary Michael Levitt is letting "anti-choice activists ... infest organizations that perform the vital task of offering women choices" (a.k.a. abortions) "regarding their reproductive health" (though many women seeking abortions are in fine health).
He refers to "this gift to the religious right" as "nothing more than an attempt by the Bush administration to inject religious zealotry into the realm of science" and suggests that this should be opposed by all physicians.
Dr. Adalja is entitled to his opinion, but there will be health professionals outside abortion clinics, making no attempt to "infest" anything, who may find themselves abruptly faced with situations where they face pressure to either facilitate an abortion or face termination, especially now that "abortion" can entail such simple but time-critical measures as RU-486 and high-dose oral contraceptives.
Regardless of whether you regard the pre-implantation and other early stages of development as human life with inalienable rights, respect that some physicians do, and choosing to respect that life in refusing to facilitate terminating it is a critical moral decision for many people. That is not "zealotry."
Facilities determined to offer 24/7 abortion services in whatever form shouldn't find ensuring adequate "pro-choice" staffing a major hurdle.
Richard Lunsford, MD, Hopkinsville, Ky.
Note: This item originally appeared at http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/2008/11/24/edlt1124.htm.
