A Doctor's Duty (Armstrong Williams)

An interesting ruling on abortion occurred in the high courts of Trenton, N.J., recently. There was a unanimous decision that a doctor has no duty to tell a woman considering an abortion that her embryo is an “existing human being.” What makes this ruling interesting is that it actually cuts both ways. As a Christian and someone who respects all life, it seemed at first like this story was aimed against people who believe that way, but the reason for the ruling is quite fascinating. 

Rosa Acuna was between six and seven weeks pregnant but had experienced the anguish associated with miscarriages. Due to that unpleasant experience she decided to consult a doctor. The doctor told her that a problem with her kidneys was causing complications and for that reason she needed an abortion. When she inquired about the status of the fetus inside her womb, the doctor dismissed her, saying, “It’s only blood." Long story short, she consented to the abortion but continued bleeding even after going through with an abortion she didn’t want. She concluded after talking to a nurse that she had consented to an abortion on faulty information. So, as is all too common in our overly litigious society, she sued.

My respect for life again is reaffirmed, yet it seems that judges are protecting doctors from litigation based upon their beliefs. While it may seem that the doctor in this case may have been misleading (and downright liable), everyone should know that on matters that involve life and death, it is recommended to seek a second opinion and maybe a third and fourth as well.

Archived under: The Judiciary
Permalink TrackBack  Email This Post


Share this post
      What's This