re: Queries

[Schoenhofer <schoenho@via.at>]

At 07:49 20.02.1997 -0600, you wrote:
>     Regarding the physician who recommended abortion for a fetus 
>     [potentially] exposed to what was [probably] a small tritium uptake:
>     
>     I think we're making way too many assumptions regarding this anecdotal 
>     reference.  There are some potential confounding factors that I see 
>     (IMO):
>     1.  The physician may be stupid - unlikely but possible
>     2.  The physician may be uninformed - quite credible, but not certain
>     3.  The physician may have been looking for an excuse to advise the 
>     woman to have an abortion because he's a big proponent thereof, for 
>     economic, political, etc., reasons - probably not as credible as 2., 
>     and you'd never be able to prove it anyway
>     4.  The woman wanted/considered/asked about an abortion, but needed a 
>     credible reason for doing so, either as a sop to her conscience or for 
>     legal reasons - also credible
>     5.  The physician used tritium as a scapegoat for some other reason 
>     that would have been harder to explain to the woman, in the knowledge 
>     that the woman wouldn't know the difference
>     
-------------------------------------------------------

Dear George,

I agree with you, that there might be many reasons for the physician to act
as she or he did. My comment was to the message as it was distributed on
radsafe. I do not want to comment on various considerations for abortion,
because all my three children were most welcome and deliberately "created".
I have never been in the situation to find a justification for abortion and
I do not condemn anybody who had to make a decisions. But I think that if a
decision has been made it should be named by the reason, if law so requests.
Blaming tritium uptake would sure not the correct way.

Best regards,

Franz
Schoenhofer
Habichergasse 31/7
A-1160 WIEN
AUSTRIA/EUROPE
Tel./Fax:	+43-1-4955308
Tel.:		+43-664-3380333
e-mail:		schoenho@via.at