This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hollingshead, S. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hollingshead, S. C.
Related Collections
Right arrow Abortion
CMAJ • July 22, 2003; 169 (2)
© 2003 Canadian Medical Association or its licensors

Letters
Correspondance

Abortion perils debated

Shauna C. Hollingshead

Medical Student, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alta., Canadian Physicians for Life

In response to those who have taken issue with CMAJ over publication of the article by David Reardon and associates,1 I would like to point out that in medical ethics the concept of informed consent is of paramount importance. Regardless of one's opinions about the abortion issue, educating patients about the benefits and risks of an intervention is integral to good medicine. Thus, physicians should be willing to inform their patients of the risks associated with abortion. Aside from the usual risks associated with a surgical procedure, these include increased risks of psychiatric illness,1 future preterm birth2 and breast cancer.3,4

I commend CMAJ for refusing to allow politics to trump the scientific progress of women's health care.

Shauna C. Hollingshead Medical Student University of Alberta Edmonton, Alta. Canadian Physicians for Life

References

  1. Reardon DC, Cougle JR, Rue VM, Shuping MW, Coleman PK, Ney PG. Psychiatric admissions of low-income women following abortion and childbirth. CMAJ 2003;168(10):1253-6.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  2. Henriet L, Kaminski M. Impact of induced abortions on subsequent pregnancy outcome: the 1995 French national perinatal survey. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 2001;108:1036-42.
  3. Brind J, Chincilli VM, Severs WB, Summy-Long J. Induced abortion as an independent risk factor for breast cancer: a comprehensive review and meta-analysis.J Epidemiol Community Health 1996; 50:481-96.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  4. Daling JR, Malone KE, Voigt LF, White E, Weiss NS. Risk of breast cancer among young women: relationship to induced abortion. J Nat Cancer Instit 1994;86:1584-92.[Abstract/Free Full Text]




This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hollingshead, S. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hollingshead, S. C.
Related Collections
Right arrow Abortion