Ethics at interview and the old cigarette

What exactly is the purpose of this thread? It's turned into the OP just preaching his views from a podium. Is there a point here?

I will not agree with something just because it's legal in the UK. My morals are not related to UK laws in the slightest. The law tells me if I can be punished for doing something or not, it can't tell me whether it's right or wrong. It is as simple as that.

I believe that human life should be protected from conception (i.e. sperm joining with egg, not the blastocyst implanting) and so morally abortion is murder; therefore all abortifacients should be banned including the morning-after pill. I supported the Personhood Amendment in Mississippi last autumn (unfortunately it got voted down 57%-43%) which would have criminalised all killing of unborn children. I will not support any means of killing a child before birth unless it is the only way of saving the mother's life, which is extremely rare. Even babies with abnormalities and babies conceived in rape do not deserve death.

99% of doctors support abortion? Where did you get that from? 75% of the public are "pro-choice" according to the largest recent survey, but I am not sure what pro-choice means: that it's morally right, that it's morally wrong but should remain legal so other people can have a choice, that it's morally wrong but criminalising it would cause more problems for individuals and society so pragmatically it should stay legal, or that in certain circumstances (rape, very young age of mother, foetal abnormality, baby would be brought into abusive environment, mother with health problems that make being pregnant a bigger risk for her etc) but wrong in others. It is most definitely not a "fringe position" that abortions without good justification are wrong. In any case I will not just follow the multitude. Morality is not decided by majority vote.

It IS a conservative/liberal issue, but social conservative, not fiscal (which is what the UK Conservative Party is more into.) Frank Field is a Labour MP and left-wing fiscally but is very much pro-life and pro-family. I am a "movement conservative", consistent across a wide range of social and fiscal issues.
Although I am uncompromising on killing the preborn, I do have a balanced view on self-inflicted illnesses. The whole thing about not treating Jews is a red herring because I would not refuse to treat anyone, nor do I believe that smokers do not "merit" treatment. It is purely a matter of priority.

Intentional self-harm is usually the result of a mental illness which the patient has no choice over. You don't choose to have the disorder so it would be unjust to determine a person's place in the queue in A&E, for example, because they had just had a cutting episode.

Well you're probably right but this is the internet so...



Right, OK, so i'm as gratified as i am that you chose to write such a length rebuttal to a short point, i'm not really terribly interested in the abortion debate.

But you have highlighted something useful. Somebody's duty as a doctor to comply with NHS regulations, for instance treating self inflicted illnesses the same as others, should come before their personal beliefs in most cases (obviously abortion is an exception to this).
This is how the GMC sees it and how people are required to behave as a doctor.

NB: the Conservative party in the UK is not socially conservative as you describe it, they support gay marriage and abortion, as much as you don't.