The role of conscience and virtue: contrasting two models of medicine.

Today's medical ethics involve two different viewpoints based on how we understand the role of conscience in medicine and the purpose of healthcare. The first view, called the health-directed model, sees medicine as a way to improve health and promote healing, while also respecting the values of both patients and doctors. In this model, doctors need some discretionary space to decide how to achieve the best health outcomes in their practice. On the other hand, the service-provider model sees the main goal of medicine as providing a service, especially healthcare, with a strong focus on protecting patient autonomy. In this view, doctors are required to provide care even when it goes against their personal beliefs.The goal of this article is to explore the foundations and arguments of these two medical models. Understanding the key ideas behind these models is important for deciding whether to support or oppose conscientious objection in medical ethics. Additionally, the article aims to figure out which model makes a stronger case and to offer advice on how to engage with the opposing view from a virtue ethics perspective.

Conscientious Objection and the Anesthesiologist: An Ethical Dilemma.

Conscientious objection is a legally protected right of medical professionals to recuse themselves from patient care activities that conflict with their personal values. Anesthesiology is different from most specialties with respect to conscientious objection in that the focus is to facilitate safe, efficient, and successful performance of procedures by others, rather than to perform the treatment in question. This could give rise to a unique, somewhat indirect ethical tension between the application of conscientious objection and potential infringement upon patient autonomy and well-being. While some situations have clear grounds and precedent for conscientious objection (e.g., abortion, or futile procedures), newer procedures, such as gender-affirming surgery and xenotransplantation, may trigger conscientious objection for complex reasons. This review discusses ethical, legal, and practical aspects of conscientious objection; challenges to anesthesia groups, departments, and healthcare organizations when conscientious objection is invoked by anesthesiologists; and strategies to help mitigate the ethical dilemmas.

Moral Diversity for Medical Trainees.

While the proliferation of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives among medical schools and residency training programs has provided important benefits of demographic and experiential diversity among medical trainees, there has not been a similar emphasis upon the importance of moral diversity in medical training. Enhanced attention to the importance of moral diversity and the centrality of conscience to medical practice might allow trainees to better interface with the morally diverse patients they serve, learn important virtues like humility, patience, and tolerance, and deepen their understanding of and appreciation for alternative moral viewpoints among their fellow practitioners.

Choosing to Provide: Early Medical Abortion and Clinician Conscience in Ireland.

Providers are essential to the delivery of abortion care. Yet, they often occupy an ambiguous space in political discourse around abortion. The introduction of a new abortion service in Ireland invites us to look afresh at providers. Since the Health (Regulation of Termination of Pregnancy) Act 2018 came into force, by far the most common form of abortion care has been early medical abortion (EMA). This is typically provided by General Practitioners (GPs), with approximately 10% of GPs having chosen to provide EMA. This article draws on an empirical study of providers to investigate their motivations for, and experiences of, provision and their views on colleagues who have not chosen to provide. The study shows that for many providers, the choice to provide was grounded in a moral commitment to protecting women's rights to autonomy and health and ensuring that the harms of the past were not repeated. The article argues that notwithstanding increased normalisation of EMA in Ireland, conscience still has a role to play in abortion care provision and it is important to reflect on the various aspects of this role.

Conscience, Disobedience, and Standard of Care.

In the article "Principled Conscientious Provision: Referral Symmetry and Its Implications for Protecting Secular Conscience," Abram L. Brummett, Tanner Hafen, and Mark C. Navin reject what they call the "referral asymmetry" in U.S. conscientious objection law in medicine, which recognizes rights of conscientiously objecting physicians to withhold referrals for medical interventions but does not (yet) recognize rights of physicians to make referrals for medical interventions to which they are morally committed but to which their health care institutions are morally opposed. This commentary concentrates on a second asymmetry, namely, the relationship of a health care provider's referral or nonreferral to the medical standard of care. The commentary argues that this second asymmetry seems to require action more appropriately recognized as civil disobedience than conscientious provision of referral.

Conscience, Caricatures, and Catholic Identities.

Catholic health care is often viewed as antithetical to secular conceptions of autonomy. This view can engender calls to protect "choice" in Catholic facilities. However, this view is built on a fundamental misunderstanding of the Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services (ERDs). This commentary, which responds to "Principled Conscientious Provision: Referral Symmetry and Its Implications for Protecting Secular Conscience," by Abram Brummett et al., seeks to demonstrate the nuance of the ERDs as well as to address some of the challenges various Catholic identities have when interpreting and living out the ERDs so that all patients receive high-quality, compassionate care. By highlighting the Church's desire to protect all people at every stage, I hope to dispel the caricatures that often result from misunderstandings by Catholics and non-Catholics alike.

Principled Conscientious Provision: Referral Symmetry and Its Implications for Protecting Secular Conscience.

"Conscientious provision" refers to situations in which clinicians wish to provide legal and professionally accepted treatments prohibited within their (usually Catholic) health care institutions. It mirrors "conscientious objection," which refers to situations in which clinicians refuse to provide legal and professionally accepted treatments offered within their (usually secular) health care institutions. Conscientious provision is not protected by law, but conscientious objection is. In practice, this asymmetry privileges conservative religious or moral values (usually associated with objection) over secular moral values (usually associated with provision). In this article, we first argue for a legal right to one kind of conscientious provision: referral for procedures prohibited at Catholic hospitals. We then argue that a premise in that argument-the principle of comparably trivial institutional burdens-justifies legal protections for some additional forms of conscientious provision that include, for example, writing prescriptions for contraception or medical abortions. However, this principle cannot justify legal protections for other forms of conscientious provision, for instance, the right to perform surgical abortions or gender-affirming hysterectomies at Catholic hospitals.

Oaths, Conscience, Contracts, and Laws-The Gathering Storm Confronting Medical Professionalism.

This Viewpoint explains the 3 trends­personal conscience, employment contracts, and laws­that challenge physicians from putting their patients first and offers ways to reverse these barriers.

Conscientious Objection.

Physicians may under some circumstances decline to provide a clinical service that is within accepted medical standards due to a deeply held moral belief that to do so would be wrong. Conscience objection in medicine is legally protected, but ethically limited by physician obligations to put patient interests first. Accommodation to conscientious objections, when possible, recognizes the diverse moral perspectives and benefits for both the objectors and the profession as a whole. When these situations arise, physicians have obligations to respectfully resolve the distress of conscientious objectors while still honoring the primacy of patient care needs.

Concept analysis of conscience-based nursing care: a hybrid approach of Schwartz-Barcott and Kim's hybrid model.

BACKGROUND: The nursing profession considers conscience as the foundation and cornerstone of clinical practice, which significantly influences professional decision-making and elevates the level of patient care. However, a precise definition of conscience in the nursing field is lacking, making it challenging to measure. To address this issue, this study employed the hybrid approach of Schwartz Barcott and Kim to analyze the concept of conscience-based nursing care. METHODS: This approach involves a three-phase process; theoretical, fieldwork, and analytical. A systematic literature review was conducted using electronic databases during the first phase to find relevant papers. The content of 42 articles that met the inclusion criteria was extracted to determine the attributes, antecedents, and consequences of consciousness care using thematic analysis. Based on the working definition as a product of this phase, the plan of doing the fieldwork phase was designed. During this phase, data were collected through interviews with nurses all of whom were responsible for patient care in hospitals. In this phase, 5 participants were chosen for in-depth interviewing by purposeful sampling. Data were analyzed using directed content analysis. The findings of the theoretical and fieldwork phases were integrated and the final definition was derived. RESULTS: The integration of the theoretical and fieldwork phases resulted in identifying four key characteristics of conscience-based nursing care. Firstly, it involves providing professional care with a conscientious approach. Secondly, ethics is at the core of conscience-based care. Thirdly, external spirituality plays a significant role in shaping one's conscience in this context. Finally, conscience-based nursing care is both endogenous and exogenous, with professional commitment being the central focus of care. CONCLUSION: Conscience-based nursing care is an essential component of ethical care, which elevates clinical practice to professional care. It requires the integration of individual and social values, influenced by personal beliefs and cultural backgrounds, and supported by professional competence, resources, and a conducive organizational atmosphere in the healthcare field. This approach leads to the provision of responsive care, moral integrity, and individual excellence, ultimately culminating in the development of professionalism in nursing.

The effect of conscience perception on job satisfaction and care behaviours in nurses.

Conscience is a force capable of making judgments about one's own moral values during individual behaviour. Conscience in nursing is a concept that is perceived as authority and an inner voice, and it positively affects nursing care. Today, according to many research results, conscience is an indicator of professionalism that affects our personal and professional lives. This research was carried out to determine the effect of nurses' perceptions of conscience on job satisfaction and care behaviours. A cross-sectional study was performed in a training and research hospital. The sample size of 338 nurses was determined by power analysis, and the participants were selected using a simple random sampling method. The data were collected between June and November 2020. A "Personal Information Form", the "Conscience Perception Scale (CPS)", the "Nurse Job Satisfaction Scale (NJSS)" and the "Caring Behaviours Scale-30 (CBS-30)" were used to collect the data. The nurses obtained a score of 63.36 ± 12.13 on the CPS, indicating a high level of conscience perception; a total of 3.41 ± 0.69 points on the NJSS, revealing a high level of job satisfaction; and a total of 150.42 ± 21.22 points on the CBS-30, implying that care perceptions were found to be high. It was determined that the nurses' perceptions of conscience had an effect on their job satisfaction and care behaviours (R = 0.398, Adjusted R2 = 0.158, p = 0.000). The nurses who participated in the study had a high perception of conscience, which positively affected their job satisfaction and care behaviours.

Perseverance, a measure of conscientiousness, is a valid predictor of achievement and truancy across the globe.

Is Conscientiousness a useful construct across cultures? Using the 2012 Program for International Student Assessment data, we examined whether perseverance, a measure of Conscientiousness, was related to achievement and truancy across 62 countries/regions (N > 470,000). We investigated whether these relationships were linear or curvilinear in nature and assessed the utility of item-level information. After establishing partial metric invariance of the perseverance measure across various countries/regions and cultural regions, our findings unveiled that perseverance consistently predicted both math achievement and truancy, with predominantly linear associations. Notably, among the five items of the Perseverance scale, the item reflecting one's tendency to give up easily in the face of challenges emerged as the strongest and most consistent predictor of math achievement. Further, country-level correlations between perseverance and both math achievement and truancy displayed contradictory patterns compared to individual-level correlations, suggesting the presence of biasing factors in how people respond to these measures. Nonetheless, it appears reasonable to conclude that measures of Conscientiousness are pan-cultural predictors of achievement and truancy. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Enhancing Content Validity Assessment With Item Response Theory Modeling.

BACKGROUND: Ensuring the validity of assessments requires a thorough examination of the test content. Subject matter experts (SMEs) are commonly employed to evaluate the relevance, representativeness, and appropriateness of the items. This article proposes incorporating item response theory (IRT) into model assessments conducted by SMEs. Using IRT allows for the estimation of discrimination and threshold parameters for each SME, providing evidence of their performance in differentiating relevant from irrelevant items, thus facilitating the detection of suboptimal SME performance while improving item relevance scores. METHOD: Use of IRT was compared to traditional validity indices (content validity index and Aiken's V) in the evaluation of items. The aim was to assess the SMEs' accuracy in identifying whether items were designed to measure conscientiousness or not, and predicting their factor loadings. RESULTS: The IRT-based scores effectively identified conscientiousness items (R2 = 0.57) and accurately predicted their factor loadings (R2 = 0.45). These scores demonstrated incremental validity, explaining 11% more variance than Aiken's V and up to 17% more than the content validity index. CONCLUSIONS: Modeling SME assessments with IRT improves item alignment and provides better predictions of factor loadings, enabling improvement of the content validity of measurement instruments.

Three Arguments Against Institutional Conscientious Objection, and Why They Are (Metaphysically) Unconvincing.

The past decade has seen a burgeoning of scholarly interest in conscientious objection in healthcare. While the literature to date has focused primarily on individual healthcare practitioners who object to participation in morally controversial procedures, in this article we consider a different albeit related issue, namely, whether publicly funded healthcare institutions should be required to provide morally controversial services such as abortions, emergency contraception, voluntary sterilizations, and voluntary euthanasia. Substantive debates about institutional responsibility have remained largely at the level of first-order ethical debate over medical practices which institutions have refused to offer; in this article, we argue that more fundamental questions about the metaphysics of institutions provide a neglected avenue for understanding the basis of institutional conscientious objection. To do so, we articulate a metaphysical model of institutional conscience, and consider three well-known arguments for undermining institutional conscientious objection in light of this model. We show how our metaphysical analysis of institutions creates difficulties for justifying sanctions on institutions that conscientiously object. Thus, we argue, questions about the metaphysics of institutions are deserving of serious attention from both critics and defenders of institutional conscientious objection.

Conscientious refusal or conscientious provision: We can't have both.

Some authors argue that it is permissible for clinicians to conscientiously provide abortion services because clinicians are already allowed to conscientiously refuse to provide certain services. Call this the symmetry thesis. We argue that on either of the two main understandings of the aim of the medical profession-what we will call "pathocentric" and "interest-centric" views-conscientious refusal and conscientious provision are mutually exclusive. On pathocentric views, refusing to provide a service that takes away from a patient's health is professionally justified because there are compelling reasons, based on professional standards, to refuse to provide that service (e.g., it does not heal, and it is contrary to the goals of medicine). However, providing that same service is not professionally justified when providing that service would be contrary to the goals of medicine. Likewise, the thesis turns out false on interest-centric views. Refusing to provide a service is not professionally justified when that service helps the patient fulfill her autonomous preferences because there are compelling reasons, based on professional standards, to provide that service (e.g., it helps her achieve her autonomous preferences, and it would be contrary to the goals of medicine to deny her that service). However, refusing to provide that same service is not professionally justified when refusing to provide that service would be contrary to the goals of medicine. As a result, on either of the two most plausible views on the goals of medicine, the symmetry thesis turns out false.

Health providers' reasons for participating in abortion care: A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: There is a global shortage of health providers in abortion care. Public discourse presents abortion providers as dangerous and greedy and links 'conscience' with refusal to participate. This may discourage provision. A scoping review of empirical evidence is needed to inform public perceptions of the reasons that health providers participate in abortion. OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to identify what is known about health providers' reasons for participating in abortion provision. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies were eligible if they included health providers' reasons for participating in legal abortion provision. Only empirical studies were eligible for inclusion. SOURCES OF EVIDENCE: We searched the following databases from January 2000 until January 2022: Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, Excerpta Medica Database, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, ScienceDirect and Centre for Agricultural and Biosciences International Abstracts. Grey literature was also searched. METHODS: Dual screening was conducted of both title/abstract and full-text articles. Health providers' reasons for provision were extracted and grouped into preliminary categories based on the existing research. These categories were revised by all authors until they sufficiently reflected the extracted data. RESULTS: From 3251 records retrieved, 68 studies were included. In descending order, reasons for participating in abortion were as follows: supporting women's choices and advocating for women's rights (76%); being professionally committed to participating in abortion (50%); aligning with personal, religious or moral values (39%); finding provision satisfying and important (33%); being influenced by workplace exposure or support (19%); responding to the community needs for abortion services (14%) and participating for practical and lifestyle reasons (8%). CONCLUSION: Abortion providers participated in abortion for a range of reasons. Reasons were mainly focused on supporting women's choices and rights; providing professional health care; and providing services that aligned with the provider's own personal, religious or moral values. The findings provided no evidence to support negative portrayals of abortion providers present in public discourse. Like conscientious objectors, abortion providers can also be motivated by conscience.

The establishment of conscientious monopolies in rural communities.

In the United States, healthcare providers have the federally protected right to conscientiously refuse to provide treatments or services that they feel violate their moral or religious values. This refusal of services is colloquially known as "conscientious objection," which has become a polarizing topic in today's medical and ethical landscape. Typically, physicians exercising their right to conscientious objection do not represent a barrier in access to care for most patient populations. This dynamic shifts, however, in rural America, where there are relatively few providers. In this commentary, we discuss some of the unique ramifications that are likely to occur when rural providers invoke conscientious objection in their medical practice and how this can in turn establish conscientious monopolies for the members of their communities.

HHS Issues Revised Health Worker Conscience Rule.

The aim is to balance the rights of clinicians and patients.