Letters: Abortion violates medical ethics

The Advocate’s recent article (Sept. 27) regarding the sale of the abortion facility of the late, late-term abortionist George Tiller in Topeka, Kans., to a group that intends to reopen it as “a family and women’s health center that will offer abortions,” was frightening.

The new owner admits that the “services” of killing unborn babies a few weeks before term will not be offered because the enlightened Kansas Legislature tightened restrictions on late-term abortions, although earlier abortions are planned.

How one does abortions in a “family” context is beyond me, as killing young, future family members is absolutely inconsistent with, and in fact inimical to, the concept of family.

It is also unclear to me where the new owner, a former Tiller employee, proposes to obtain proper medical staff for her venture.

The Hippocratic Oath, which has governed ethical medicine for some 25 centuries, has an absolute proscription on abortion. It states, “I will give no deadly medicine to anyone if asked, nor suggest any such counsel; furthermore, I will not give to a woman an instrument to produce abortion.”

Obviously, the new proprietress cannot hope to have an ethical staff, something truly vital in medicine, especially when young, innocent lives are involved. Is she then intending to hire medically unethical people similar to other abortionists in the news?

For example, people such as those at the former Philadelphia facility of medically licensed Kermit Gosnell? He was indicted for eight counts of murder last year following a raid that found “filthy, deplorable and disgusting blood on the floor; the stench of urine; cat feces on the stairs; [and] semiconscious women moaning in the waiting or recovery rooms, covered with bloodstained blankets.” The counts included grisly infanticide that involved Gosnell snipping the spines of babies who had been purposely prematurely born so they could be killed moments later.

Or is she planning to hire unethical “physicians-in-training” who have not yet matured in the medical arts sufficiently to know right from wrong, rather than only what power their recently acquired medical knowledge gives them, yet without proper or genuine concern for life or health and safety problems? Either way, the prospect is frightening. When one lets go of fundamental ethics — while having power over others less knowledgeable than oneself or simply gullible — anything can happen, and often will!

Dr. W.A. Krotoski, president,

The Hippocratic Resource

Baton Rouge

Comments

1) Comment by Spudaroonski - 22/10/2012

Yes Phil, the laws are confusing. On one hand the government will throw you in jail and perhaps execute you if you take a life. Then that same government will turn around and give you a medal and label you a hero for killing as many people as you can on the battle field or directing a drone to its target. That's what I call really confusing.

2) Comment by DMJ - 22/10/2012

Good point, Chritter. You can't be against contraception, against unplanned pregnancy and against abortion as well. Something's gotta give. That is, unless you're anti-premarital sex, in which case you're also anti-reality.

3) Comment by Chrilter - 22/10/2012

1st) According to Louisiana Law, a baby is not considered a person for legal purposes until born alive. (For any of those who are confused on the law) 2nd) It's funny to me that the same folks (like ole Krotoski) that rally against abortion are also the same folks who rally against teaching young people about contraceptions, and safe sex. Further, they protest the government for making employers offer insurance that covers contraceptives. But THEN, they get all up in arms when a woman wants to have an abortion because she couldnt get the contraceptives or wasnt properly educated on the importance of using them

4) Comment by phil - 22/10/2012

Yes the laws are clear, but incorrect and confusing. Murder is not murder when a Mother decides it is not murder?

5) Comment by gofigger - 22/10/2012

If I wanted to murder someone, that would be my choice regardless of any law or opinion. Let women make their own choices.

6) Comment by potkcalb - 22/10/2012

I agree with you MBW but the unproductive harangue will go on!

7) Comment by MBW - 21/10/2012

According to the GOP, life begins at conception and ends at birth.

8) Comment by MBW - 21/10/2012

Frankly I'm sick of abortion as a political issue. We all know where the parties stand and there is almost nobody who is undecided. So please, let's debate issues where having a debate actually accomplishes something. Nothing to see here folks...move on.

9) Comment by HRoark - 21/10/2012

W. A. Krotoski - Adjunct Professor of Veterinary Immunology (Hansen's Disease Research Center) (7-1-97) B.A., University of California, 1960; Ph.D., University of California, 1968; M.D., University of California, 1968; Diplomate, American Board of Preventive Medicine. He's a veterinary researcher. Of course no one favors abortion and no woman wants to have one, but sometimes practical issues prevail, just as they do in killing the hypothetical home invader, who might really be a nice person making poor decisions. The hypocrisy of the religious zealots on this topic are mind bendingly irrational. They favor killing persons on death row who are no longer a threat to anyone, but argue the pious sanctity of a fetus. If we were at risk of running out of people, that argument might have some legs, but with 7 billion of us out there, one abortion more or less will not endanger our species, so why make it illegal?

10) Comment by chem - 21/10/2012

Society goes down a very slippery slope when religion is allowed to dictate public policy. What if a child or adult is admitted to a hospital after being in an accident. The person will die if a blood transfusion is not done immediately. But the person is a jehovah witness, whose religion does not allow such medical care. So the person is to die just because of some stupid superstition? What if the injured person is a teenager who does not agree with his parents. Does the parents religious nonsense override the teenagers wish to live? Islam is known for its honor killings. Should that be allowed based on religious belief? What about all of the reasons the bible gives for killing people? Should we allow killing for adultery? For kids being disobedient? So you see, this is why religion should not be allowed in public policy or law making.

11) Comment by chem - 21/10/2012

The problems with abortion are entirely due to politicians and religious advocates putting their religious beliefs in public policy rather than let science determine what is proper. A fetus, certainly in the first early months, is not a human, nor is it viable. And certainly at the moment of "conception" there is nothing that is remotely close to a "human". One can argue that until it is born, a fetus is not a live human. This is one of many examples that are much more difficult than need be, in fact, almost intractable, because of mixing religion with public policy. It is a live human, the woman, who should make the decision about her body. If she doesn't believe in abortion, than so be it. But that belief should not be forced on others who do not share it.

12) Comment by Chucky - 21/10/2012

Women will have abortions, do you want them safe or unsafe ?

13) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 21/10/2012

Nope Phil, the laws are clear. You are confused and trying to muddy the waters (yet again). Krotoski is a one trick pony. Why do we need to hear the same tired argument from him? Note to the advocate, I don't follow any of the links to advertisers when i comment on the site. So posting "controversial" letters doesn't contribute to your bottom line.

14) Comment by phil - 21/10/2012

palefire - for another example, a person breaks into my home and I am a women. I then shoot the intruder and also shoot myself in the stomach and kill my unborn child. What does one have to do with the other? One is self defense, and one is still murder. The woman actually made the decision to murder her unborn child. The laws ARE very confusing I think.

15) Comment by prbeav - 21/10/2012

@ScotB. I doubt anyone favors abortion, even the woman who decides not to remain pregnant. However, who favors forcing a pregnant woman who does not want to remain pregnant to carry to term, especially when her decision comes early in the process or is based on bad circumstances she understands.>>>>It is an easy call to pay the cost for police protection. However, who wants to pay people to force a woman to remain pregnant, and who would apply for the job?>>>>Is a woman's life not a miracle worthy of protection? Is there no room for consideration of the woman's life?

16) Comment by ScotB - 21/10/2012

Life itself is a miracle. Anyone who has had children and loves them with all their heart should understand why abortion is such a travesty. If not, I pity them - truly.

17) Comment by Maelstrom - 20/10/2012

Interesting he uses a line from the original Hippocratic Oath. As it turns out, very, very few Medical Schools use the original oath. In fact, I doubt that more than 3 or so still use the original oath. While I can't speak for all medical schools, I suspect very few use the lines at all about not giving a woman a "pessary" to commit an abortion. Also, to suggest that this is the standard by which physicians have been judged by is a blatant falsehood. It makes me wonder of Dr. Krotoski is a physician at all. Perhaps before he writes this type of letter with its multiple false statements, Dr. Krotoski should speak with a lawyer or one of the medical ethicists present at every medical school.

18) Comment by prbeav - 20/10/2012

Like DMJ and chem, I oppose the views expressed by the letter writer. Moreover, I abhor the violence he invokes, which perhaps expresses the personal frustration he seems to suffer. Whether he reforms or not, he should know that many of us find more informative other opinion, like E.J. Dionne’s statement (column, Oct. 9) regarding the Catholic Church, “Those among the faithful who see the abortion issue as trumping all others are in a quarrel with their brethren who place more emphasis on the church's long-standing commitment to social justice.”

19) Comment by DMJ - 20/10/2012

To quote Mitt Romney, "I believe abortion should be safe and legal in this country." Surely, a doctor knows that if abortion is made illegal (it won't be) then women will still seek such services, except that they'll be forced to go to those who are unlicensed and unregulated. The days of back-alley abortions are over, "doctor." Stop trying to impose your views on others. Where are all the "limited government" folks on this issue? Conspicuously silent.

20) Comment by chem - 20/10/2012

The modern version of the hippocratic oath, of which there are several, do not contain a mention of abortion. The oath cited in the letter is from the original version, written thousands of years ago. The letter is only his opinion and seems to be behind the times.

21) Comment by Whatnow - 20/10/2012

Is she then intending to hire medically unethical people similar to other abortionists in the news? The answer is.... yes.

22) Comment by palefire - 20/10/2012

Phil, I will not even attempt to get into whether abortion should be legal or not, but your argument below fails. For example, a murderer breaks into your house and goes after your family with a knife. You grab your gun and shoot him dead. This is not murder. Is that confusing to you too?

23) Comment by phil - 20/10/2012

The laws are often confusing. Fetal homicide laws might be used to convict someone who kills an unborn baby. However, the mother of the baby can make that same decision to kill her baby and be within the law. Sometimes murder is considered to be murder and sometimes it isn't. Sure sounds confusing to me.