Protecting the rights of conscience of health care providers

Wardle, D J D Lynn

doi:10.1080/01947649309510912

Cited by 20 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Conscientious Practice/Physician Integrity. Conscientious practice reminds us that physicians have their own ethical integrity that warrants respect 38,39 . Patients, colleagues, or administrators should not be allowed to compromise a physician's integrity, which is both personal (the beliefs and values we bring to the practice of medicine) and professional (the beliefs and values the practice of medicine requires of us).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A clinician’s approach to clinical ethical reasoning

2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We offer a systematic strategy that situates clinical ethical reasoning within the paradigm of clinical reasoning. The trajectory of this strategy parallels clinical reasoning: a plain statement of the initial problem, careful gathering of data, a differential diagnostic assessment, and articulation and confirmation of a justified plan. This approach pays special attention to the goals of medical care, because so much depends on whether or not physician and patient share the same goals. This approach also addresses the heterogeneity of clinical problems that at first appear ethical and acknowledges the ethical pluralism that pervades clinical ethics.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A clinician’s approach to clinical ethical reasoning

2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…At this institution, there is an anti-MAiD physician whose conscience tells them that they must not provide MAiD. Because the Group 2 proponents support protecting personal conscientious objection regardless of what other personnel want (7,45,47,48), the Group 2 proponents would support requiring the institution to allow personal conscientious objection in this case. Thus, the Group 2 proponents would prioritize the anti-MAiD physician's conscience over the consciences of however many of the institution's personnel want to work in a community where everyone follows pro-MAiD values.…”

Section: Group 2: Allowing Ico Respects the Consciences Of Personnel ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The Group 2 proponents might try to circumvent this counterargument by arguing that anti-MAiD healthcare institutions should engage in ICO differentlyspecifically, by only accepting anti-MAiD personnel -which would admittedly avoid the problem of having to prevent personnel from providing MAiD. However, this circumvention attempt would fail because it falls victim to a similar counterargument, given that the Group 2 proponents oppose pro-MAiD healthcare institutions only accepting pro-MAiD personnel(45) 11. In another article, Murphy and Genuis give more reasons, specifically, reasons regarding moral integrity and moral responsibility(49).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Institutional Conscientious Objection to Medical Assistance in Dying in Canada: A Critical Analysis of the Personnel-Based Arguments

Abernethy

2023

bioethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Debate rages over whether Canadian provincial and territorial governments should allow healthcare institutions to conscientiously object to providing medical assistance in dying (MAiD). This issue is likely to end up in court soon through challenges from patients, clinicians, or advocacy groups such as Dying With Dignity Canada. When it does, one key question for the courts will be whether allowing institutional conscientious objection (ICO) to MAiD respects (i.e., shows due regard for) the consciences of the objecting healthcare institutions, understood as unitary entities. This question has been thoroughly explored elsewhere in the academic literature. However, another key question has been underexplored. Specifically, precedent set by the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Loyola High School v. Quebec (Attorney General) suggests that the courts will consider whether allowing ICO to MAiD respects the consciences of the personnel within objecting healthcare institutions. My answer to this question is no, by which I mean that allowing ICO to MAiD shows undue disregard for some consciences and undue regard for others. To justify this answer, I analyze the arguments that hold that allowing ICO in healthcare respects the consciences of the personnel within objecting healthcare institutions. My conclusion is that none of these personnel-based arguments succeed in the case of ICO to MAiD. Some fail because they are wrong about the nature of conscience and complicity. Others fail because they contradict the arguments’ proponents’ positions on conscientious objection by individual healthcare providers. Still others fail because they are internally inconsistent.

show abstract

“…In general, those laws exempt conscientious objecting doctors and nurses from being forced to perform abortions and to be free from termination, discrimination, and reprisal from employers for exercising that right (Wardle 1993).…”

Section: State Conscience Lawsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Crisis of Conscience: Pharmacist Refusal to Provide Health Care Services on Moral Grounds

Kelly

Ellis

Rosenthal

2010

Employ Respons Rights J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Advances in technology have resulted in medical procedures and practices that were unthought-of in previous generations. Embryonic stem cell research, abortifacients, birth control, and artificial insemination are just a few examples of these technological advances. While many individuals readily embrace such medical advances, others find them morally objectionable. A contentious national debate is now occurring over whether employee pharmacists have the right to refuse to fill legal prescriptions for emergency contraception because of conscientious objections. In the United States, existing public policy is somewhat muddled in both protecting and encroaching on the employee pharmacist's right of refusal. This article discusses the legal and ethical nature of that controversy, as well as the clash of interests, rights and responsibilities between employers, employee pharmacists and customers from a U.S. perspective.Advances in technology have resulted in medical procedures and practices that were unthought-of in previous generations. Embryonic stem cell research, abortifacents, birth control, and artificial insemination are just a few examples of these technological advances which are either legally sanctioned or conceivably could be in the not too distant future. While many individuals readily embrace such medical advances, others find them morally objectionable.The debate over whether health care employees, in the scope of their employment, have the right to refuse to provide legally sanctioned health care services on moral grounds is a

show abstract

Protecting the rights of conscience of health care providers

Cited by 20 publications

References 4 publications

A clinician’s approach to clinical ethical reasoning

A clinician’s approach to clinical ethical reasoning

Institutional Conscientious Objection to Medical Assistance in Dying in Canada: A Critical Analysis of the Personnel-Based Arguments

Crisis of Conscience: Pharmacist Refusal to Provide Health Care Services on Moral Grounds

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About