The word "thing" where secondly used in this section includes only things ejusdem generis with instrument and capable of being used to produce miscarriage (R. v. Austin [1905] 24 N.Z.L.R. 893).
Therapeutic Abortion.—In New Zealand, as in Great Britain and other countries, the medical profession has always held that when the mother's life is seriously endangered by a continuation of the pregnancy the termination of the pregnancy is justifiable and right.
This the law allows, not specifically but by inference.
It is probably a correct statement of the position to say that, with advances in medical knowledge and thought, even the most conservative medical opinion, apart from that which is influenced by certain religious views, holds that the indications for the termination of pregnancy have been extended somewhat to include not only cases in which the mother's life is immediately jeopardized, but also certain cases in which her life is more remotely endangered.
This view is supported by the social thought of to-day.
This is not to say that the occasions for this operation are frequent; they are, indeed, infrequent.
The general standards which guide the medical profession in this matter are very strict, and are conscientiously conformed to by the majority of its members.
It is also a well-recognized rule of the profession that such operations should only be performed after consultation between two medical practitioners.
With this change in medical outlook, however, there has been no corresponding alteration in the law, which, as it stands, is as uncompromising as ever, and allows of no interference except to save the life of the mother.
It is a fact that the law is interpreted liberally, and no doctor who has acted honestly in the belief that the mother's health was seriously endangered has ever been challenged.