Go Symbol Lookup
Loading...

Supreme Court Abortion Decision Criticized in Key Medical Journal

 Text Size  
Published: Monday, 23 Apr 2007 | 3:10 PM ET
By: Mike Huckman

One of the world's most prominent peer-reviewed medical journals is weighing in on last week's U.S. Supreme Court decision on abortion.

In a "perspective" piece in the online issue of the New England Journal of Medicine a University of Wisconsin bioethcist writes that the decision "poses a threat to doctors" who perform partial birth abortions especially ones that are needed to save the life of a pregnant woman.

Dr. Alta Charo argues that "the mere prospect of being investigated by a possibly hostile prosecutor may well have a chilling effect on" doctors' decision making.

And in a journal editorial Dr. Jeffrey Drazen writes that the decision "has sanctioned the intrusion of legislation into the day-to-day practice of medicine."

He concludes by saying "the judicial branch has regrettably joined the legislative branch in practicing medicine without a license."

 Print
One of the world's most prominent peer-reviewed medical journals is weighing in on last week's U.S. Supreme Court decision on abortion.

   
Comments

 

More Comments

 
 

Add Comments

 

Your Comments (Up to 1100 characters):

Remaining characters

Your comments have not been posted yet.

Please review your submission to make sure you are comfortable with your entry.

Your Comments:


                
            
            
        

Featured

U.S. Video

  • Every single economic report beat the Street's expectations this week. Insight on the markets, and the Fed's impact, with Andy Cross, Motley Fool.

  • Discussing what's next for IRS official Lois Lerner, and whether it's time for an IRS special counsel, with Tom Curran, Peckar & Abramson and John Eastman, Chapman University.

  • The Jersey shore will reopen this weekend after it was damaged by Super Storm Sandy. CNBC's Kayla Tausche reports New Jersey has spent $25 million in marketing.