Lethbridge Herald

Doctors must offer referrals

DOCTORS WHO OBJECT TO TREATMENT ON MORAL GROUNDS MUST GIVE REFERRAL: COURT

- Paola Loriggio THE CANADIAN PRESS — TORONTO

Ontario doctors who have a moral or religious objection to treatments such as assisted dying, contracept­ion or abortions must refer patients to another doctor who can provide the service, after a court found it is necessary to guarantee that vulnerable patients can access the care they need.

A group of five doctors and three profession­al organizati­ons had launched a legal challenge against a policy issued by the province’s medical regulator, arguing it infringed on their right to freedom of religion and conscience under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The group — which includes the Christian Medical and Dental Society of Canada, the Canadian Federation of Catholic Physicians’ Societies and Canadian Physicians for Life — said the requiremen­t for a referral amounted to being forced to take part in the treatment.

The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, meanwhile, said its policy aims to balance the moral beliefs of individual physicians while nonetheles­s ensuring access to care, particular­ly for vulnerable patients.

In a ruling released Wednesday, the divisional court said that though the policy does limit doctors’ religious freedom, the breach is justified. The benefits to the public outweigh the cost to doctors, who can choose to practise a specialty where such moral dilemmas will not arise, the court said.

“The goal of ensuring access to health care, in particular equitable access to health care, is pressing and substantia­l. The effective referral requiremen­ts of the policies are rationally connected to the goal,” Justice Herman J. Wilton-Siegel wrote on behalf of a three-member panel.

“The requiremen­ts impair the individual applicants’ right of religious freedom as little as reasonably possible in order to achieve the goal.”

What’s more, the court found, “the applicants do not have a common law right or a property right to practise medicine, much less a constituti­onally protected right.”

“Those who enjoy the benefits of a licence to practise a regulated profession must expect to be subject to regulatory requiremen­ts that focus on the public interest, rather than the interests of the profession­als themselves,” Wilton-Siegel wrote.

The groups said they were disappoint­ed with the ruling and would review their options in regards to an appeal.

“We heard from our members and other doctors with conscienti­ous objections over and over again that they felt referral made them complicit and that they wouldn’t be able to live with themselves or stay in the profession if effective referral is still required,” Larry Worthen, executive director of the Christian Medical and Dental Society of Canada, said in a statement.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada