The Reality of Institutional Conscience

Abstract

Opponents of conscience protections for Catholic Health Care institutions claim that, since institutions are not autonomous individuals, they are not subjects of conscience. Therefore, since institutional conscience does not exist, it does not deserve protection. In this article, the author demonstrates not only that institutional conscience exists but that it is an activity that pervades all human institutions. He provides a metaphysical sketch that illustrates how institutions are organic outgrowths of human social nature which mitigate the natural limitations of human individuals. Consequently, the activity of conscience is inherently a component of the life of human institutions.

Perspectives of Major World Religions regarding Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide: A Comparative Analysis

“…As is the case for individual conscientious objection, legislating bodies should consider the issue of institutional conscientious objection. The idea of institutional conscientious objection is controversial given that institutions are not autonomous individuals and therefore, arguably, they lack the capacity to have a conscience (Bedford, 2016 ). Furthermore, when institutional conscientious objection is codified, there are potential occasions where individual clinicians are compelled to disregard the instructions of their own conscience in determining medical care in deference to institutional policies (Spencer, 2011 ), although prospective employees are made aware of institutional requirements and are asked to comply prior to commencing employment.…”

“…It can also be argued that an institution relies on social agency where its actions occur through its members. This requires “socially coordinated behavior to enable each component part to pursue the institutional ends in harmony” (Bedford, 2016 ). Regardless of the theoretical position on institutional conscience taken, significant practical ramifications can be imagined in jurisdictions that legalise EPAS without allowing for institutional “opt outs”.…”

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

“…12 He defines institutional conscience as "a judgment of practical reason made by an individual on behalf of an institution, applying institutional norms to a particular situation" (56, p.265). By "norms," he means "normative criteria," which can be established by things like policies (56). Based on these definitions, Bedford argues that "doing" institutional conscience is a manifestation of personal conscience, in the same way that personal conscientious objection is a manifestation of personal conscience (56).…”

“…By "norms," he means "normative criteria," which can be established by things like policies (56). Based on these definitions, Bedford argues that "doing" institutional conscience is a manifestation of personal conscience, in the same way that personal conscientious objection is a manifestation of personal conscience (56). For Bedford, the main difference is just that "doing" institutional conscience applies institutional norms to a situation (even if one disagrees with those norms), whereas personal conscientious objection applies one's own norms to a situation (56).…”

Book Review: Caring for Children with Severe Neurologic Impairment: A Life with Grace

“…One point, however, that her analysis avoids is the implications that her licensing board solution has on institutional conscience protections. This is not some small debate or merely ancillary topic in the debate (Bedford 2016). For instance, would a Catholic hospital be required to hire an abortionist and allow them to provide terminations in order to meet the state licensing board's provider distribution quota?…”