The Battle for Medicine

Filed on 31 July 2018 in Food For Thought category. Print This Page

The Battle for Medicine

“Traditional” medicine is under attack on many inter-related fronts perhaps broadly represented by these specific front lines.

Liberty of Conscience in Medicine

The exercise of conscience is foundational to good medicine. It underlies every aspect of good medical practice, to make good patient care our first concern and to practice medicine safely and effectively. See

But this is at risk even from within the profession “If people are not prepared to offer legally permitted, efficient, and beneficial care to a patient because it conflicts with their values, they should not be doctors”. Professor Julian Savulescu, Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, BMJ 2006;332:294-297 February 4.

For further discussion including doctors not being able to access training places in various disciplines see

Informed Consent

Truly informed consent is being suppressed by those of particular ideology, particularly with respect to abortion – the mounting evidence for the breast cancer connection, Post-Abortion Syndrome and pre-term birth cannot be so easily dismissed. Our liberty to tell truth is at risk.

Doctors as “providers of medical services”

Turning doctors into mere service providers of medical services on demand instead of doctors with conscience, with the traditional doctor/patient relationship being replaced by a mere service-provider/consumer contract, providing all that is legal whether or not it is consistent with their ethical base.

To sacrifice conscience and be concerned only with service provision is to destroy the heart and soul of medicine. For fuller discussion see

Law of the State overriding medical ethics.

Governments may legislate to permit certain practices or procedures but governments must never force doctors to violate their conscience by compulsory engagement in such practices or procedures – as indeed has happened with Section 8 of the Victorian 2008 legalisation of abortion compelling doctors to refer to another doctor for abortion.

The Independence of the medical profession is critical – belief in practice as enshrined in UDHR and ICCPR and non-derogable, that cannot be overridden even in national emergency (article 4 ICCPR).

When legal code supersedes moral code, the slope of a culture’s decline is steep and swift. J. Scott Ries, MD

Medical codes of conduct must never be subject to degradation by government. Permission becomes Compulsion.

Life – it’s definition, when does it begin and when does it become of value?

The need for the definition being highlighted by

  • Euthanasia and physician assisted suicide: euphemistically described as MAiD (Medical Aid in Dying); turning healers into killers; confusing the problem of suffering with the life of the person to kill the pain but not the person with it; unrestricted even for the non-dying; even for existential distress in teenagers, economic strangulation of palliative care services; funding limited for patients seeking palliative care but funding given for assisted suicide. See article by Dr David van Gend of 7 July, Did Granny jump, or was she pushed? Euthanasia is a threshold too far.
  • Abortion: the continuing push for legalisation with no restriction on time, method or reason (even de-selection of a female twin). Down Syndrome genocide.
  • Routine pre-natal diagnosis with implied embryo selection or abortion of the defective (even compulsory) Already parents who do not agree to have their babies “de-selected” are labelled “genetic outlaws” and face the accusation “how dare you bring this financial impost on the community.”
  • Destructive embryo research for the sake of the living including stem-cell research
  • Designer babies to provide cells for siblings
  • Cloning for the sake of cell and even organ provision for living siblings or other relatives, even the clone parent
  • Promotion of Infanticide (“post-birth abortion”) before onset of “self-awareness” for abnormalities

Medical Board of Australia

And now, astonishingly and unexpectedly, the MBA with its threatened clamping down (Draft Code 2018) of free speech by doctors and with Good Medical Practice being subject to “cultural beliefs” and transgender and identity ideology. These changes would add penalty to perceived breaches relating to any of the above threats to the future of medicine and free debate or expression of views on these threats. Is the MBA itself now into unprofessional conduct in the sense of sabotaging Good Medicine? At least now it has reversed its policy to list complaints against doctors even when the complaints have been found to be without substance. Watch this space.


Good Medicine is the heart and soul of Good Medical Practice. It requires and demands skill, knowledge, sensitivity, respect for people and their backgrounds to ensure good health outcomes. It involves understanding, assessing what is happening and what is needed, education and explanation, and working respectfully with the patient to ensure the best possible good health outcome.

When Medicine falls, so does society. When Medicine loses its heart and soul, society is the poorer.

Lachlan Dunjey 31 July 2018.

PS and, if medicine does lose its heart and soul, will succeeding generations even realise what has been lost?

Share |