Even for medical practitioners who are pro-abortion, this is a dangerous precedent to set—first they came for Dr. Terence Davids, tomorrow they’ll come for you. (A Martin Niemöller poetic iteration, if you will.)

Here’s the story, from a post published by the Campaign Life Coalition (CLC):

Dr. Davids is a physician working in Saskatoon at the Bridge City Mediclinic.

…

One day last December, a woman came into the clinic to have her pregnancy assessed by Dr. Davids. However, the purpose of her visit was not to check on the health of her child. This visit was to gather size and development details to pass along to another doctor, who would then dismember and destroy her child through an elective abortion.

As a Christian, Dr. Davids was naturally very concerned about the woman’s intentions and the fate of the preborn child she was carrying. He asked her if she believed in the Lord, and he said to her very candidly, ‘I don’t think you should go through with this… I think you should reconsider.’

Apparently, Dr. Davids’s healthcare advice made the woman conspiring to murder the baby in her womb “uncomfortable and anxious,” so she filed a complaint with the regulatory agency (College of Physicians and Surgeons of Saskatchewan, or CPSS). And, per the document shared by CLC, CPSS already determined Dr. Davids to be “guilty,” so now he’s facing a disciplinary action hearing, and his license to practice medicine is set to be revoked. (It’s unclear if any sort of evidentiary hearing took place, but I doubt it did).

Yeah, those anxious feelings bothering this young woman? They weren’t Dr. Davids’s fault for suggesting she rethink her decision to kill her precious child, they were due to the fact that she was planning to pay someone to dismember her own flesh and blood. As the authors of the CLC post aptly put it:

Frankly, this mother should feel uncomfortable and anxious about killing her preborn child! She should feel disturbed about having to face God over the matter one day. It is not what the doctor said that caused her anxiety, it is what she was planning to do to her preborn child.

Exactly.

But this all comes back to the point I stressed at the outset—dragging a physician in for disciplinary hearings because he said something that made his patient “uncomfortable and anxious” is a dangerous precedent to set, both for patients seeking qualified medical care, and the practitioners striving to uphold their Hippocratic oaths, and provide such care.

Stripping Dr. Davids of his license, because he provided the best care possible for his patient(s), is asinine, and criminal; this will only serve to hamstring medical providers from offering the best care that they know how, because any competent medical advice could be construed as offensive. Ironically, Dr. Davids was giving the most proper and professional medical advice possible to this young woman, because aside from any physical complications, post-abortive women often experience serious psychological trauma. Post-Abortion Syndrome, or Post-Abortion Stress Syndrome is a very real and very serious fallout experienced by a majority of post-abortive women—despite leading pro-abortion medical organizations suggesting otherwise—in one way or another. (There’s a reason that grief counseling after an abortion is a common event, while you’d never see someone considering abortion, who then chose life for her baby, seek out grief counseling because of that decision.)

If this agenda progresses, the next thing you know is complaints will be filed against doctors for not speaking up about the extreme fallout of abortion—a mother kills her child, suffers from PAS, then rails against the doctor who didn’t tell her what was going to happen if she murdered her own baby. Similarly, we’re seeing this with the de-transitioning children, unaware of the consequences of making life-altering decisions under duress, unaware of the full scope of ramifications.

What happens when a doctor who provides bariatric care tells a morbidly obese patient that…she’s morbidly obese, and going to die if things don’t change—will he be accused of fatphobia and unprofessional conduct?

What about the doctors who aren’t gifted with “bedside manner” the way they are with expertise, skill, or knowledge? Will they be convicted of “unbecoming, improper, unprofessional, or discreditable conduct” like Dr. Davids was?

What if a psychiatrist diagnoses a subject with a severe personality disorder, or acknowledges that hallucinations and voices are evidence of “mental illness” and something is “wrong” in his/her mind? Surely language like that would make a person “uncomfortable and anxious,” right?

And any bad news broken to a patient by any oncologist would undoubtedly leave him/her with feelings of discomfort and angst.

Of course, I could go on and on.

If we know anything about the agenda of the progressive left, and the trajectory of society and institutions once its ideologues gain a foothold, it’s all downhill—and nothing, no matter how nonsensical or destructive, is out of the question.

Image: Free image, Pixabay license.