I can’t believe these people are doctors

- August 16th, 2012

I’m fine with doctors having political opinions, we all have them. But when doctors claim to voice political opinions based on their medical expertise they better get their facts straight.

The Canadian Medical Association which is a political advocacy group and not a scientific body is currently holding a General Council meeting in Yellowknife. The doctors decided to raise the issue of abortion and their fear that a motion by Conservative MP Stephen Woodworth might spell the end of abortion.

Now I don’t expect a doctor to know the difference between a motion and a bill even if they are flapping their gums about it but I do expect them to know the difference between abortion and say contraception. Here’s what Montreal physician Dr. Genevieve Desbiens told Postmedia.

“This attempt to modify the definition of a human being could legally recognize the fetus, which would give the fetus rights. This constitutes a recriminalization, not only of abortion, but any form of contraception.”

Really?

How does recognizing a fetus as a human being make contraception illegal since by using contraception you are not making a fetus or a baby as most pregnant women call it. (That’s another point, have you ever heard a woman say I’m got a fetus inside me? What about claiming they felt the fetus kick?)

I really have to question the medical qualifications of Dr. Desbiens at this point. She also said that changing the definition of what is a human could stop pregnant women from flying or taking certain prescription drugs.

Here’s another gobsmackingly stupid comment from a doctor that should never have made it past the reporter never mind the editor.

Dr. Carole Williams, of Victoria, said the private member’s motion “is a back-door way for government to reopen Roe versus Wade,” the 1973 decision that legalized abortion in the United States.

When I saw that in the Postmedia story I was sure that the reporter must have been a new graduate getting their feet wet in unfamiliar territory but that’s not the case, instead she’s been reporting on health issues for 15 years.

How on earth can a non-binding motion to hold a study and debate in the Parliament of Canada overturn a court ruling from the United States Supreme Court?

Of course it can’t but facts are not the point of these stories or the one from The Globe. The point is to scare people.

There is a simple reason a group of doctors would not want such a debate. The science is clear, life begins at conception. Abortion ends a human life.

Admitting that makes those that support abortion on demand uncomfortable. Better to just avoid the issue in their eyes.

Categories: Politics

Subscribe to the post

2 comments

  1. Adam Ogieglo says:

    As a family physician, a pro life family physician I might add, I am outraged that the CMA has come out making a controversial political statement like this without consulting with the members. I am not paying my membership dues to have them misrepresent and deceive the public by making statements which imply that all physicians are against Woodworth’s motion. I will be contacting the CMA and will be encouraging other pro life physicians to do the same. Simply outrageous. Thanks Brian for bringing this to light.

  2. Joss says:

    Hmmm… some contraceptives prevent implantation of a fertilized egg in to the wall of the uterus. So, what that doctor says is actually correct, in the literal interpretation.

Comments are closed.