rss
J Med Ethics 2009;35:390-394 doi:10.1136/jme.2008.026344
  • Research ethics
    • Paper

Medical students’ attitudes to abortion: a comparison between Queen’s University Belfast and the University of Oslo

  1. R Steele
  1. Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast, Northern Ireland, UK
  1. Rosie Steele, Department of General Practice, Dunluce Health Centre, 1 Dunluce Avenue, Belfast BT9 7HR, UK; rosieasteele{at}hotmail.com
  • Received 5 July 2008
  • Revised 4 January 2009
  • Accepted 3 March 2009

Abstract

Background: Abortion policy varies significantly between Northern Ireland and Norway. This is the first study to compare medical students’ attitudes towards abortion in two different countries.

Objective: To assess medical students’ attitudes to abortion at the University of Oslo (UiO) and Queen’s University Belfast (QUB).

Design: An anonymous questionnaire completed by 59 medical students at UiO and 86 medical students at QUB.

Participants: Students who had completed their obstetrics and gynaecology placements during 2006/2007.

Results: The students’ responses (UiO versus QUB) were as follows: response rate, 95.2% vs 92.5%; stated no religious affiliation, 48.0% vs 4.7%; pro-abortion, 78.2% vs 14.3% (χ2 = 58.160, p<0.001); had seen an abortion while studying medicine, 74.6% vs 9.4% (χ2 = 73.183, p<0.001); in favour of abortion when there was a threat to the mother’s life, 100% vs 93.3% (χ2 = 6.143, p = 0.150); in favour of providing abortion on the mother’s request, 86.4% vs 9.3% (χ2 = 42.067, p<0.001); in agreement that women should have access to free abortion services (mean value on a 5-point Likert scale 1.69 out of 5), versus in disagreement (mean 3.76, p<0.001).

Conclusion: There were significant differences in students’ attitudes to abortion, reflecting differences in religious, legal and educational experiences.

Footnotes

  • Funding: A medical student elective bursary was provided by the Institute of Medical Ethics.

  • Competing interests: None declared.

  • Ethics approval: Ethics approval was obtained from the research ethics committee of School of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Queens University Belfast (reference number 07/01).

  • Provenance and Peer review: Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Responses to this article

Register for free content


Free sample
This recent issue is free to all users to allow everyone the opportunity to see the full scope and typical content of JME.
View free sample issue >>

Free archive
The full back archive is now available for JME. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006, back to volume 1 issue 1.
Register to access the free archive >>

Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.