The Reasonableness Standard for Conscientious Objection in Healthcare
Tóm tắt
In complex, pluralistic societies, different views concerning the moral duties of healthcare professionals inevitably exist: according to some accounts, doctors can and should cooperate in performing abortion or physician-assisted suicide, while according to others they should always defend human life and protect their patients’ health. It is argued that the very plurality of responses presently given to questions such as these provides a liberal argument in favour of conscientious objection (CO), as an attempt to deal with moral diversity by protecting both the professionals’ claim to moral integrity and the patients’ claim to receive lawful and safe medical treatments. A moderate view on CO is defended, according to which none of these claims can be credited with unconditional value. Claims to CO by healthcare professionals can be justified but must be subjected to a reasonableness standard. Both the incompatibility of CO with the medical profession and its unconditional sanctioning by conscience absolutism are therefore rejected. The paper contributes to the definition of the conditions of such reasonableness, particularly by stressing the role played by conceptions of good medicine in discriminating claims to CO; it is argued that respecting these conditions prevents from having the negative consequences dreaded by critics. The objection according to which accepting the physician’s duty to inform and refer is inconsistent with the professed value of moral integrity is also discussed.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Brock, D.W. 2008. Conscientious refusal by physicians and pharmacists: Who is obligated to do what, and why? Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 29(3): 187–200.
Brummett, A. 2021. When conscientious objection runs amok: A physician refusing HIV preventative to a bisexual patient. Clinical Ethics 16(2): 151–154.
Cantor, J. 2009. Conscientious objection gone awry — Restoring selfless professionalism in medicine. New England Journal of Medicine 360(15): 1484–1485.
Cantor, J., and K. Baum. 2004. The limits of conscientious objection — May pharmacists refuse to fill prescriptions for emergency contraception? New England Journal of Medicine 351(19): 2008–2012.
Card, R. 2007. Conscientious objection and emergency contraception. American Journal of Bioethics 7(6): 8–14.
———. 2014. Reasonability and conscientious objection in medicine: A reply to Marsh and an elaboration of the reason-giving requirement. Bioethics 28(6): 320–326.
———. 2020. A new theory of conscientious objection in medicine: Justification and reasonability. New York: Routledge.
Clarke, S., A. Giubilini, and M.J. Walker. 2017. Conscientious objection to vaccination. Bioethics 31(3): 155–161.
Cowley, C. 2016. A defence of conscientious objection in medicine: A reply to Schuklenk and Savulescu. Bioethics 30(5): 358–364.
Giubilini, A. 2014. The paradox of conscientious objection and the anemic concept of “conscience”: Downplaying the role of moral integrity in health care. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 24(2): 159–185.
Magelssen, M. 2012. When should conscientious objection be accepted? Journal of Medical Ethics 38(1): 18–21.
McConnell, D. 2021. Conscientious objection in health care: Pinning down the reasonability view. The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 46(1): 37–57.
McConnell, D., and R.F. Card. 2019. Public reason in justifications of conscientious objection in health care. Bioethics 33(5): 625–632.
Minerva, F. 2017. Conscientious objection, complicity in wrongdoing, and a not-so-moderate approach. Cambridge Quarterly Healthcare Ethics 26(1): 109–119.
Myskja, B.K., and M. Magelssen. 2018. Conscientious objection to intentional killing: An argument for toleration. BMC Medical Ethics 19(1): 1-9.
Oderberg, D.S. 2017. Further clarity on cooperation and morality. Journal of Medical Ethics 43(4): 192–200.
———. 2018. Opting out: Conscience and cooperation in pluralistic society. London: Institute of Economic Affairs.
Pellegrino, E. 2002. The physician’s conscience, conscience clauses, and religious belief: A catholic perspective. Fordham Urban Law Journal 30(1): 221-244.
Rawls, J. 1996. Political liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press.
Saad, T.C. 2019. Conscientious objection and clinical judgment: The right to refuse to harm. The New Bioethics 25(3): 248–261.
Savulescu, J. 2006, Conscientious objection in medicine. British Medical Journal 332: 294–297.
Savulescu, J., and U. Schuklenk. 2017. Doctors have no right to refuse medical assistance in dying, abortion or contraception. Bioethics 31(3): 162–170.
Schuklenk, U. 2015. Conscientious objection in medicine: Private ideological convictions must not supersede public service obligations. Bioethics 29(5): ii–iii.
———. 2019. Conscience-based refusal of patient care in medicine: A consequentialist analysis. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 40(6): 523–528.
Schuklenk, U., and R. Smalling. 2017. Why medical professionals have no moral claim to conscientious objection accommodation in liberal democracies. Journal of Medical Ethics 43(4): 234–240.
Wicclair, M.R. 2011. Conscientious objection in health care: An ethical analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
———. 2019. Preventing conscientious objection in medicine from running amok: A defense of reasonable accommodation. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 40(6): 539–564.