Access to abortion
==================

* Janet Epp Buckingham

*   © 2007 Canadian Medical Association or its licensors

Sanda Rodgers and Jocelyn Downie1 imply that there is a constitutional right to abortion. The Supreme Court of Canada, in the 1988 Morgentaler decision, did rule that the Criminal Code provision violated women's rights; however, all of the judges agreed that Parliament has a legitimate interest in protecting the unborn fetus. In 1990, Parliament considered a bill that would have restricted abortion, particularly in the latter stages of pregnancy. Given that abortion and its regulation and restriction continue to be hotly debated in Canada, it is not simply “like any other medical procedure.”

It is also inaccurate to portray a physician who exercises a right of conscientious objection to participating in abortion as violating CMA policy. The 1988 CMA Policy on Induced Abortion2 specifically allows for such a right of conscientious objection.

## REFERENCES

1.  1. Rodgers S, Downie J. Abortion: ensuring access [editorial]. CMAJ 2006;175(1):9.
    
    [FREE Full Text](http://www.cmaj.ca/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiRlVMTCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NDoiY21haiI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czo3OiIxNzUvMS85IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6MjI6Ii9jbWFqLzE3Ni80LzQ5Mi4yLmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 

2.  2. *R.* v. *Morgentaler *(1988), 1 S.C.R.
    
    

3.  3. Induced abortion [CMA policy]. Ottawa (ON): Canadian Medical Association; 1988.