Access to abortion

The guest editorial in the July 4, 2006, issue1 contains 2 factual errors.

First, Sanda Rodgers and Jocelyn Downie have misrepresented the 1988 Supreme Court decision in R. v. Morgentaler by stating that as a result of this decision “a woman's right to continue or terminate a pregnancy is protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.” In fact, although the Court identified section 25 of the Criminal Code as objectionable because of its procedural requirements, it also stated that the primary objective of this section, the protection of the fetus, “does relate to concerns that are pressing and substantial in a free and democratic society and which, pursuant to s.1 of the Charter, justify reasonable limits to be put on a woman's right.”2

Second, the authors have misrepresented the CMA Code of Ethics by linking the failure to provide referrals for abortion with the prohibition of “discrimination on the basis of sex, marital status and medical condition.” The relevant section of the Code only states the following: “Inform your patient when your personal values would influence the recommendation or practice of any medical procedure that the patient needs or wants.”3

These factual errors could seriously mislead CMAJ readers.