This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Glenn H. Lytle, MD
Tulsa, Okla

JAMA. 1990;264(2):182-183.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.—

In a recent article¹ about the doctor-patient relationship, two assumptions were made. I believe these assumptions were misleading. These assumptions were then used to equate the principle of the doctor-patient relationship with the right to have an abortion.

In the authors' initial section of their essay, they state that "it is thus no longer possible to believe realistically that the issues raised by abortion laws involve abortion alone: they raise the fundamental questions of how far the state can go to control physicians." I am one who is actively seeking to overturn the legality of abortion on demand. The issue is abortion, an immoral and disgusting act. The outrage is against this act, and in no way does restricting abortions interfere with the principle of the doctor-patient relationship. This relationship is already justifiably limited by the laws of the land. For example, the fact that we . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?