Repeal of Roe c. Wade has been a frequent topic in many spheres of conversation. The recent marches in Washington DC, organized by reproductive rights activists and targeted restrictions regarding contraceptives in universities, show that this critical debate is far from over.
The philosophical approach to guaranteeing the duration of a pregnancy from conception is complicated, its implications may not have been entirely clear since the protections afforded by Roe v. Wade has come to an end, but they will begin to manifest more concretely in the months and years to come.
“States that attempt to limit abortion from the moment of conception, not from the moment of pregnancy (as a medical professional would define it) could also challenge the right to contraceptives, potentially intrauterine devicess (IUD),” explained Wendy Parmet, director of the Center for Health Policy and Law at Northeastern University for BNC News.
According Guttmacher Institutemark lines that arbitrarily place the beginning of life, and sometimes even the dimension of the person from conception, in the implantation or at different stages of pregnancy without being the subject of a general consensus, produces disastrous consequences for female and neonatal public health. The site specializing in reproductive health research explained that the most accepted definition in the medical community and federal government policies is one that defines pregnancy as a process that begins at the time of implantation. If you’re trying to legislate from a philosophical and moral position that understands conception as the onset of pregnancy, then technically contraceptives not only prevent it, they also stop it. What do these considerations mean for those who teach and study medicine?
The medical career without reproductive health
Perhaps the most visible impact on the educational experience of medical students is the lack of comprehensive reproductive health training programs in the states. This in universities that align themselves with a conservative policy. The shortage of women’s health centers was already a serious problem. The exodus of doctors with the skills to occupy them would be even more critical.
A full note in The Guardian it deals with more detailed and direct implications for the quality of medical education. “If we can’t show that we provide enough expertise to build competency in this area, it threatens the accreditation of any contested program.” Dr. Carrie Cwiak, professor of obstetrics and gynecology, as well as director of the division of family planning at Emory School of Medicine in Atlanta, explained how programs and accreditations in her area would be affected by legislation. against reproductive health.
Ethics training, crucial for the training of any health professional, is also facing a decline in quality. In the manuscript “The implications of the repeal of Roe v. Wade on Medical Education and Future Physicians,” written by Ariana M. TraubeKellen Mermil-Bunnell and a total group of six Emory School students, discuss the need for abortion discourse in colleges, to teach professionalism and deconstruct bias.
“Students need to reflect on the relationship between their personal beliefs and their obligations as health professionals, especially when these do not coincide”, argue the students, in defense of an academic training which, instead of closing discussions on sensitive topics, educates to address them. with humanity and professional ethics. In turn, they argue that programs that include a comprehensive reproductive health curriculum enhance respect for patient privacy and autonomy, a core practice of the trade in all branches of medicine.
As a doctor, student or professor in the medical field, what do you think of the impact that restrictive legislation could have on administration and education in reproductive health? Have you noticed any changes in your institution’s policies or programs? Do you think these decisions could affect the training of new doctors in the future? Tell us in the comments.