It’s been a long time in the making, but today marks the public
launch of a new web project aimed at informing people about health care
professionals who object to or refuse to provide reproductive health services,
like contraception, abortion, non-directive and non-biased counselling, pharmacy products and so on.
Called My Decision/Kei a au te Whakataunga the site grew out of failed efforts to get
the people who should be doing the job of keeping patients informed, such as
the Medical Council of New Zealand, to do it. There’s a lot of background about
the long road travelled on this issue here in Aotearoa New Zealand over at Alranz’s blog, but this is broader than abortion rights (and not an Alranz project, though
they’re supporters. By way of probably obvious disclosure, I’m involved in this
project).
Below, you’ll find the media release that went out this morning, and
at the end of this post, a couple of interesting links to recent discussion about the issue of conscientious
objection/refusal to treat/conscientious obstruction (supporters of reproductive
justice are coming up with some interesting ways of describing whatever this
is).
We hope people will spread the word across social media, networks, etc. There are some downloadable fliers on the site itself. And, of course, let the site know about providers who object.
My Decision. Kei a au te Whakataunga.
www.mydecision.org.nz
MEDIA RELEASE FOR
IMMEDIATE RELEASE
17 August 2014
NEW WEBSITE LISTS DOCTORS WHO OPPOSE
CONTRACEPTION
A new grassroots project aimed at
sharing information about doctors and other medical professionals who hinder
reproductive health-care access because of moral or religious reasons is being
launched today online.
Called My Decision/Kei a au te
Whakataunga (www.mydecision.org.nz), the project invites people
seeking services like contraception or abortion to report any experiences of
hostile or unhelpful health professionals to the website.
But the site is not just for
patients. My Decision spokesperson Terry Bellamak said organisers were also
inviting doctors and others who “conscientiously object” to some services to list
what options they do and do not offer.
“From the standpoint of consumer
protection, it makes no sense to keep potential patients in the dark about
their health care providers’ intentions. ‘Conscientious objectors’ who agree
can demonstrate their good faith by registering on our site,” she said.
Ms. Bellamak said the project, which
has been a year in the making, was sparked in part by the 2010 court judgment
that expanded conscientious objection rights of doctors, and the Medical
Council’s subsequent decision not to mount a challenge, nor to publish doctors’ conscientious objection status on their website.
Since
then, there have been several worrying cases, including one in Blenheim last
year, when a woman was denied contraception by a doctor who was reported as
saying he didn't “want to interfere with the process of producing life".
“In the spirit of the old ‘Hot and
Cold Doctor files’ compiled by women’s health activists in the 1970s, we
decided we’d have to do this work ourselves,” Ms. Bellamak said.
Further Reading:
WhyWe Need to Ban ‘Conscientious Objection’ in Reproductive Health Care, by Joyce Arthur and Christian Fiala.
