On "Conscientious Objection," But Mostly on Pseudonymity

I was going to blog about a new commentary about "conscientious objection" in medicine. (Link to the full, very readable paper.)

Authorities should bar doctors from refusing to provide such services as abortion and assisted death on moral grounds, and screen out potential medical students who might impose their values on patients, leading Canadian and British bioethicists argue in a provocative new commentary.

I remembered that lawsuit launched back in 2015 by the whackadoodle group calling themselves the Christian Medical and Dental Society against the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario over a new requirement that doctors refer patients for services their precious consciences and medieval paternalism wouldn't let them even contemplate.

I remembered that Joyce Arthur of Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada had neatly and completely eviscerated their whiney self-justifications in a piece titled "Christian doctors angry they can no longer abandon their patients."

Then I remembered that I had said everything I have to say about the issue here.

I think any doctor refusing to participate in modern, non-judgemental medicine should have his or her license yanked or else shunted into a specialty or practice where they have nothing to do with lady parts.

Dermatology or podiatry would be good.

In that post, I reported on my attempt on Twitter to get the Christian doctors and dentists (WTF are dentists doing in there? "Sorry, madam, but my conscience demands that you must continue to carry that rotten molar until its natural demise"?) to make public a list of their members so that sane people could stay the hell away from them.

Well. As I reported the next day, a shitstorm ensued.

I was accused of trying to "out" the good doctors (and dentists, don't forget the dentists). Um, yeah, I was, in the interests of informing potential patients.

And I was accused of hypocrisy (spelled correctly for a change) in asking for their names from behind a PSEUDONYM!

The gang over at ProWoman/ProForcedPregnancy got particularly pissy about it, two commenters going so far as to imply that my intent was to "target" the doctors (and dentists, don't forget the dentists) for some kind of hostile action.

That second blogpost I wrote is called "FFS: Near Defamation (Is That a Thing?)." (I concluded that it probably wasn't.)

A condescending commenter at PWPFP said:

Hello Fern Hill,
I’m a lawyer, and I agree with you, this does not appear to be a case of defamation.
However, if you chose to pursue any type of litigation, you would of course have to do it in your personal capacity, using your legal name. Your association with your pseudonym “Fern Hill” and your association with your blog DammitJanet, would become permanent public record.
Kind regards,
Faye Sonier
(Please note, of course, that the comments above are not provided as legal advice.)

Ooooh. Who's threatening whom there? My legal name and my blog would become associated in the "permanent public record"!!!!

This wasn't and still isn't new. The fetus freaks are obsessed with my practice of pseudonymity. I've been chided in comments here at DJ! I've been repeatedly called "anonymous" by various anti-choicers, including those at LieShite and WeNeedALawLikeAHoleInTheHead. Over at the Amateur Statistician's I am "Fake Person" with my own label. SUZY ALLCAPSLOCK, whose hilarious blog is now sadly private (come back, SUZY, we miss you!), also had a kick at the pseudonymous fern hill can. Mrozek at PWPFP has invited me TWICE to meet for coffee. (I declined politely, of course.)

They are really really peeved that they don't know my real name.

I can't help but wonder: Why? What would they do with that information? Inform my employer? (Ha. As a member of the precariat, I have clients, not an employer. Would they try to track them all down?) Inform the world of my address and phone number, you know, in case someone wanted to send me a personal message or a nice gift?

Or maybe they have in mind merely a friendly, in-person and upfront "discussion."

Their obsession used to bother me. A little. It doesn't anymore.

WIN for Patient Rights!

In Ontario -- finally -- patient rights will trump physicians' panty-sniffing and finger-wagging.

Doctors who refuse to prescribe birth control or other medical services because of their personal values could face possible disciplinary actions, Canada’s largest medical regulator says.

Moral or religious convictions of a doctor cannot impede a patient’s access to care, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario said Friday in a 21-3 [!] vote supporting an updated Professional and Human Rights policy.

To its credit, the College held a public consultation that we encouraged people to contribute to here.

Of course the fetus freaks encouraged their gang too. And it looks like the freaks were busier.

More than 16,000 responses were received during a public consultation period — unprecedented feedback, according to Dr. [Marc] Gabel [past president and chairman of policy working group]. The vast majority opposed the referral requirement. But when the college polled 800 Ontarians last May on “conscientious objection,” a solid majority — 92% — said doctors who refuse to provide a service themselves should help patients find another doctor who would.

Here Joyce Arthur and Christian Fiala argue that conscientious objection (CO) in medicine is less analogous to CO in the military than to dishonourable disobedience.

The predictable SHRIEEKING has begun from the fetus freaks. We wonder if they'll redeploy their totally un-ironic photo of doc with gun pointed at head, which still graces its website.

We'll leave the last word to commenter Beijing York.

The god-botherers MDs should take up podiatry. It's as close to emulating Jesus they will get - bathing feet.

AFTERTHOUGHT: What would be better than "possible disciplinary actions" would be for the College to maintain a registry of doctors who WILL NOT prescribe contraception or provide other services. When the SHRIEEEKING from this dies down, DJ! will take on that campaign.