Resolution 18-205

Submitted by: Monroe G. Baldwin, Jr., M. D.

WHEREAS,       the essence of medical care is nurturing and healing a patient, community, or society forming a dynamic foundation that launches individuals into the profession to become clinicians, teachers, and researchers, and

WHEREAS,       when human life is involved, killing and nurturing are diametrically opposed, and

WHEREAS,       taking human life is not nurturing no matter how many problems it solves, and

WHEREAS,       each individual doctor/physician has free will but the profession of medicine must always maintain principles and standards, and

WHEREAS,       taking life indicates to the physician that some life is less important than other life such as providing less quality health care to those without adequate funds, and

WHEREAS,       veterinarians routinely care for all living animals, fowl, and fish except for human beings commonly taking lives to prevent spread of contagion and to prevent suffering as well as performing abortion, and

WHEREAS,       human beings are primates and therefore may have their lives taken by veterinarians as is common in that profession, and

WHEREAS,       having veterinarians perform abortion and euthanasia allows physicians to take the time honored Hippocratic Oath without exceptions which weaken it, therefore be it

RESOLVED,     that abortion and euthanasia are veterinarian procedures.



Abortion is a necessary medical procedure performed by medical doctors. Any resolution that says otherwise is a lie and should be treated like the garbage it is. 

Euthanasia is not practiced on people in the United States. Assisted suicide is legal in many state and should be legal in all states. 

This resolution betrays the writer as uneducated and reactionary, and is an embarrassment to all doctors and all politicians everywhere. 

Is this a serious proposal?  Would that not be practicing "human" medicine without a license?

Is this resolution stating that only veterinarians should perform abortions or euthanasia? Or is simply stating that we, as providers who have taken the hippocratic oath, shouldn't feel bad about performing an abortion or euthanasia because it is a veterinarian procedue? Either way this resolution is silly and makes no sense

How did such a ludicrous resolution even get to be accepted by MSV?  What an embarrasment for the entire organization that we even have to vote on this biased nonsense.

We have entertained many of Dr Baldwin’s resolutions throughout the years, but this one is the most preposterous and offensive.

i not only speak against this as an individual, I would like to propose an amendment that strikes all words in this resolution except for “physicians” “are” “for” “nurturing” “ human beings” and the resolves clause reads those words in that order.

I would also like to move that we form a committee that is empowered by the Board to censor similarly offensive, ludicrous, and embarrassing resolutions from publication in the future, as the MSV has important issues to discuss within the house of medicine and we do not have the time or resources to protect ourselves from the publicly humiliating fallout from such dribble.

respectfully submitted.


As an OB/GYN, I find this resolution ridiculous and insulting to my profession. I'm happy for other specialities who never have to care for a patient who has to choose between her own life and her pregnancy. I must respect the wishes of the patient who is looking me in the eye and speaking to me about value of her life as well as the value of her pregnancy and what she chooses to do with it. This resolution has no place in the Medical Society of Virginia. 

Physician against this resolution!!!

I find this an insulting and silly resolution that is an insult to veterinarians everywhere. To have this even proposed is a waste of time and should be dismissed out of hand by all health care providers. I encourage all MSV members to roundly reject this or any similar proposal. 

Is this physician serious?  What a waste of time. 

As an obgyn in VA, I find this resolution completely ridiculous and insulting. Obgyns should provide comprehensive healthcare for women, including abortion when requested, NOT veterinarians. This is clearly just an attempt to make abortion inaccessible to women who need it through some absurd logic about the origin of man. Please don’t insult intelligent physicians by allowing such silliness to even be entertained.

Human medicine is not veterinary medicine. This does not make sense

I am physician licensed in Virginia and oppose the the declaration of abortion being labeled only a veterinary procedure.  It should remain an accepted procedure for physicians to perform in line with their licensure, training and Hippocratic oath. 

Resolution 18-205 is offensive on so many levels. You are suggesting that women facing an unwanted, dangerous or abnormal pregnancy be cared for by veterinarians? Despite the fact that abortion is a legal and constitutionally-protected medical procedure done on women, the word "woman" does not appear once in the resolution. The language of this resolution serves to dehumanize women, and to demonize physicians who provide abortion care. This is an issue that is, and should remain, between a patient and her physician. As a maternal-fetal medicine physician who cares for women with sometimes severe medical conditions, in which pregnancy can be life-threatening, and women who are facing the reality of a pregnancy with severe fetal abnormalities, I strongly believe that the option of abortion must remain safe and legal. This resolution should have been rejected immediately by the MSV, rather than passed along for further consideration. 

When I was alerted to this resolution by a colleague I thought I was being trolled.  This sophistic screed is intentionally and unnecessarily confrontational.  The author fails to see the pregnant or dying woman in the context of self but as a non-human object incapable of making an informed choice and ,therefore, requiring an overseer to be the final arbiter based on an archaic and conflicting set of moral standards.  Shame on you for even giving this consideration. The mere fact that this is being considered by the VMS is a black eye for every physician living in the commonwealth and will make us and the Society the brunt of jokes everywhere.

This is insulting to the public and veterinarians.  Please don't waste our time.  If you're against abortion/euthanasia just say it.

This proposal is provocative and polarizing. It manages to be simultaneously offensive to women, terminally ill patients, physicians, and veterinarians. And even to non-primates. 

This is a terrible resolution,  and I hope the Society doen't take it seriously.   As physicians, we all agree that we are defenders of life.  However, decisions regarding when life starts and what is is to defend a life are not something the Society, like government, should legislate.  These are profoundly personal, religous and ethical decisons.  They belong in the realm of personal action, not in the realm of bylaws or legislation.   Should we turn end of life decisions over to veterinarians as well?  Is the implication that individuals seeking abortion are not human?  Where does this line of thinking take us?   

As an OB/GYN who advocates daily for the health and well-being of women and children, this resolution is appalling and will cause direct harm to my patients.  We need better access to preventive care including contraception and sexual health education. We need to value primary care including  the work of pediatricians and family medicine physicians.  Access to safe and legal family planning services are vital to the health of women in a society. 

Totally inappropriate to present this ludicrous resolution at a MSV meeting - or anywhere for that matter !!!

I oppose this resolution.

As an obgyn physician I provide comprehensive care to my patients, this includes abortion care. Do not compare my patients to animals. These are human women who deserve my care and access their constitutional right to choose the outcome of a pregnancy. I am not a veterinarian. I am a physician and the procedures preformed Manual Vacuum Aspiration, D+C, D+E and suction D+C, These are procedures preformed on women not animals. This language is absurd and offensive to women and should not be entertained by the Virginia medical society. 


Dr. Maloy

Alexandria, VA 

My gynecologist is not a veterinarian. And faith-based beliefs have no place in the field of medicine.  Please use your time in better pursuits.

I am an OBGYN and find this entire resolution completely insane and insulting. Abortion is a legal and necessary procedure for OBGYNs to perform. Keep your patriarchal views out of medicine.

It seems sir that you equating the care of women to veterinary medicine, and this resolution reflects your beliefs. Abortion is a medical term meaning end of pregnancy prior to 20 weeks gestation regardless of how that end has happened. Termination of pregnancy for any reason is currently legal, and to try to make it a veterinary procedure to circumvent the care of women will not work.

I strongly oppose this resolution to be brought to the meeting. 

I can not believe the MSV would waste time on such a bill.  Patients do not need to be classified as animals to receive these procedures and it demeans both patient and physician to even suggest it.

To whom it may concern (and this should concern ALL physicians) -

I am writing to express my outrage and objection to this flagrantly political, unconstitutional and sexist assault on reproductive rights.  Such a measure is contrary to everything I resolve to do with and for my patients.  Dr. Baldwin should be admonished for attempting to dehumanize women in such a callous manner.  Shame on him, and shame on MSV for giving this vile proposal a platform.  

Dr. Katherine Tyson MD


I am shocked and appalled that the MSV would give the slightest consideration to such an outrageous resolution.  This is absolute madness! That you would consider demeaning human beings with such language- and put it forward as if Virginia physicians collectively find women and their providers who seek and perform such procedures to be in violation of the Hippocratic Oath - is offensive. Keep your mysogenistic views to yourself.  There is no place in  medicine for your politics!

Shame on you!


I am an OB-gyn. This is. Impletenand utter nonsense and should be taken down immediately. 

Regardless of a person’s views on either TAE or physician assisted suicide, this proposal is insulting to the practice of medicine and our mission to provide compassionate care to society, and each other.

This resolution is  offensive. It dehumanizes women, is overtly misogynistic, demonizes abortion providers. The logic is faulty and the suggestion that veterinarians could provide safe abs appropriate care to women is deeply offensive. Should we just have plumbers do the care instead?  What an offensive waste of the medical society’s time. Instead let’s work on how access to firearms is directly related to risk to death by firearm and suicide in particular. 

My colleague, Dr Baldwin, has unfortunatelydescribed the procedure of volunary termination of pregnancy as if it were the killing of a person. I regret that the MSV must deal with such angry statements, as if they were true logic. I oppose his proposal.

Strongly oppose current attempt to put this bill for consideration. Fully disrespectful of women’s rights

This is ridiculous.  I disagree with your proposal.  Passing this would be irresponsible, harmful, and cruel.  I am a VA licensed physician.

Women die from pregnancy-related causes causes at a rate of about a half million a year.  (See the World Bank publication _Reproductive Health—The Missing Millennium Development Goal_.)  Most of those deaths are in the developing world where women in poverty lack access to skilled health care providers.  This resolution would push the commonwealth of Virginia closer to the level of care available in Bangladesh, which is not to the betterment of Virginians.  

This resolution seeks to literally dehumanize women by making the provision of a medical procedure that could save their lives provided by veterinarians.  

This resolution violates the principle of freedom of religion.  Many Christian denominations allow for abortion, and do no teach that life starts at conception because the understanding of the fusion of sperm and egg was not generally available scientific knowledge when the New Testament was written.  Judaism allows for abortion; it is curious that the Christians who oppose abortion claim to embrace the New Testament, which is silent on abortion, but turn to the Old Testament for justification of their opinions, but Judaism still allows for abortion.  Muslims allow for abortion.  Hindus allow for abortion.  

Dr. Baldwin should be ashamed of himself.

The Medical Society of Virginia is making news by entertaining this insulting resolution, but not in a good way.  

Vote no on this resolution.

i find this proposal highly offensive and trust that the medical community will see likewise 

I am a physician in Virginia. I am apalled that you would even post this on your website. This resolution is mysogyny. It is wrong. Please don't pass it.

This is ridiculous.

This is frankly one of the most absurd things I have ever read.  And just a heads up, treatment for an ectopic pregnancy is technically an abortion.

Please do not accept this ridiculous resolution.  This is an unnecessary resolution that does no good for physicians or their patients.  Physicians are most qualified for taking care of the homo sapien species.  In fact, we are the veterinarians of the humans species.  Any relegation of our responsibilities to our patients to others weakens the profession. 

  Also, do I need to mention that abortion is legal in the United States of America, whereas physician assisted suicide is not legal in Virginia.



This is completely and utterly absurd. You have this backwards. You propose "each individual doctor/physician has free will but the profession of medicine must always maintain principles and standards". Our medical standard is to care for our patients which includes providing legal abortions. Individuals may choose to use their free will to not be a part of this service. You should NOT pass this resolution. 

This is obviously ridiculous and offensive.  

Veterinarians should not perform abortions or euthanasia on humans . This is completely inappropriate and a gross overreach of their qualifications

This resolution is obsurd.  The term abortion, acorrding to miriam-webster, means "the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus: such as a : spontaneous expulsion of a HUMAN fetus during the first 12 weeks of gestation — compare miscarriage b : induced expulsion of a HUMAN fetus".   I am a VA OBGYN who cares for HUMAN patients and not animals.  I took the hippocratic oath because I believe in the sanctity of human life, and sometiems preserving human life, means the difficult descision of having an induced abortion.  THIS DOES NOT MAKE MY PATIENT AN ANIMAL and does not make me a veterinarian.  This language belittles the role of women in society and also makes the MSV appear misoginisitic.  Never in my medical training, did I learn, that taking care of HUMAN patients meant only taking care of patients without a uterus.

This resolution is unconscionable and completely inappropriate. Protecting women's rights is not veterinary medicine.

I am a licensed physician in Virginia and find this language absolutely appalling. The care of women should not be degraded by comparing it to veterinary care. Women are humans and physicians take care of them as the humans they are even when this care involves termination of pregnancy. 

I am deeply dismayed to hear the procedure of abortion, to which women have a constitutional right and which is performed legally by OBGYN who are our fellow professionals, described in such derogatory terms.

I respectfully suggest that if Dr Baldwin finds abortion so offensive he works instead to make abortions unnecessary. Dr Baldwin: I will join you in advocating for comprehensive sex education in schools and universally available, effective, free contraception. I will join you in making parenthood a more viable option by advocating for universal free health care, paid maternity leave and high quality affordable child care.

Let the MSV take a role in advocating for sensible and effective change and not be sidetracked by deliberately provocative and poorly reasoned resolutions such as this.

This is insane.  I strongly oppose this resolution.

Thank you, Medical Society of Virginia, for giving this North Carolina physician one more reason to be grateful I'm practicing in NC. Can't believe people thought it was appropriate and respectful to post this misogynistic dribble publicly. 


Add new comment

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.