w it to be used (_R._ v.
_Scully_ [1903] 23 N.Z.L.R. 380).

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.

Nevertheless, it has been urged by a large body of the medical
profession, especially of those most intimately affected by the
question, that there are possible dangers in the situation, and that
the law should be altered to indicate more specifically the rightful
position of the doctor in this matter; in other words, it is advocated
that the present interpretation of the law should be incorporated in
the law itself.

Much is made of the fact that an honourable practitioner occasionally
finds himself in the unsatisfact