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.

Guidelines for conscientious objection in Spain: a proposal involving prerequisites and protocolized procedure.

Healthcare professionals often face ethical conflicts and challenges related to decision-making that have necessitated consideration of the use of conscientious objection (CO). No current guidelines exist within Spain's healthcare system regarding acceptable rationales for CO, the appropriate application of CO, or practical means to support healthcare professionals who wish to become conscientious objectors. As such, a procedural framework is needed that not only assures the appropriate use of CO by healthcare professionals but also demonstrates its ethical validity, legislative compliance through protection of moral freedoms and patients' rights to receive health care. Our proposal consists of prerequisites of eligibility for CO (individual reference, specific clinical context, ethical justification, assurance of non-discrimination, professional consistency, attitude of mutual respect, assurance of patient rights and safety) and a procedural process (notification and preparation, documentation and confidentiality, evaluation of prerequisites, non-abandonment, transparency, allowance for unforeseen objection, compensatory responsibilities, access to guidance and/or consultative advice, and organizational guarantee of professional substitution). We illustrate the real-world utility of the proposed framework through a case discussion in which our guidelines are applied.

HHS Issues Revised Health Worker Conscience Rule.

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

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.

Understanding the extent of and limitations to conscientious objection to abortion by health care practitioners: A hermeneutic study.

The United Kingdom's Abortion Act 1967 has attracted substantial controversy, which has centred not only on the regulation of abortion itself, but also on the extent to which conscientious objection should be permitted. The aim of this study was to examine a range of healthcare professionals' views on conscientious objection and identify the appropriate parameters of conscientious objection to abortion. Gadamer's hermeneutic was utilised to frame this study. We conducted semi-structured interviews in two UK locations with 18 pharmacists, 17 midwives, 12 nurses and nine doctors, encompassing a mix of conscientious objectors and non-objectors to abortion. A multi-faceted in-depth data analysis led to the development of a hermeneutic of "respecting self and others". Four major themes of "doing the job", "entrusting to others", "acknowledging institutional power" and "being selective" and 18 subthemes contributed to this overarching theme. The complexity of the responses indicates that there is little consistency within and between each profession. They show that participants who were conscientious objectors were accepted by their colleagues and accommodated without detriment to the service, and that in larger hospitals, such as those where our work was carried out, it is possible to be employed in the service areas that include abortion while still being a conscientious objector. Finally, our results indicate that, by respecting of self and others, each profession should be able to accommodate conscience-based objections where individual practitioners seek to exercise them. Conscientious objectors as well as non-objectors have something to contribute to the ongoing development of the maternity and gynaecological services as abortion is only a small part of the work of these services.

Conscientious objection and barriers to abortion within a specific regional context - an expert interview study.

BACKGROUND: While most countries that allow abortion on women's request also grant physicians a right to conscientious objection (CO), this has proven to constitute a potential barrier to abortion access. Conscientious objection is regarded as an understudied phenomenon the effects of which have not yet been examined in Germany. Based on expert interviews, this study aims to exemplarily reconstruct the processes of abortion in a mid-sized city in Germany, and to identify potential effects of conscientious objection. METHODS: Five semi-structured interviews with experts from all instances involved have been conducted in April 2020. The experts gave an insight into the medical care structures with regard to abortion procedures, the application and manifestations of conscientious objection in medical practice, and its impact on the care of pregnant women. A content analysis of the transcribed interviews was performed. RESULTS: Both the procedural processes and the effects of conscientious objection are reported to differ significantly between early abortions performed before the 12th week of pregnancy and late abortions performed at the second and third trimester. Conscientious objection shows structural consequences as it is experienced to further reduce the number of possible providers, especially for early abortions. On the individual level of the doctor-patient relationship, the experts confirmed the neutrality and patient-orientation of the vast majority of doctors. Still, it is especially late abortions that seem to be vulnerable to barriers imposed by conscientious objection in individual medical encounters. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that conscientious objection possibly imposes barriers to both early and late abortion provision and especially in the last procedural steps, which from an ethical point of view is especially problematic. To oblige hospitals to partake in abortion provision in Germany has the potential to prevent negative impacts of conscientious objection on women's rights on an individual as well as on a structural level.

Patient-centered Engagement as a Mediator in the Associations of Healthcare Discrimination, Pain Care Denial, and Later Substance Use Among a Sample of Predominately African Americans Living with HIV.

Chronic pain is prevalent and often under-addressed among people with HIV and people who use drugs, likely compounding the stress of discrimination in healthcare, and self-medicating along with its associated overdose risk or other problematic coping. Due to challenges in treating pain and HIV in the context of substance use, collaborative, patient-centered patient-provider engagement (PCE) may be particularly important for mitigating the impact of pain on illicit drug use and promoting sustained recovery. We examined whether PCE with primary care provider (PCE-PCP) mediated the effects of pain, discrimination, and denial of prescription pain medication on later substance use for pain among a sample of 331 predominately African Americans with HIV and a drug use history in Baltimore, Maryland, USA. Baseline pain level was directly associated with a higher chance of substance use for pain at 12 months (Standardized Coefficient = 0.26, p < .01). Indirect paths were observed from baseline healthcare discrimination (Standardized Coefficient = 0.05, 95% CI=[0.01, 0.13]) and pain medication denial (Standardized Coefficient = 0.06, 95% CI=[0.01, 0.14]) to a higher chance of substance use for pain at 12 months. Effects of prior discrimination and pain medication denial on later self-medication were mediated through worse PCE-PCP at 6 months. Results underscore the importance of PCE interpersonal skills and integrative care models in addressing mistreatment in healthcare and substance use in this population. An integrated approach for treating pain and substance use disorders concurrently with HIV and other comorbidities is much needed. Interventions should target individuals at multiple risks of discriminations and healthcare professionals to promote PCE.

Ethical and Legal Considerations for Sterilization Refusal in Nulliparous Women.

We address the ethical and legal considerations for elective tubal sterilization in young, nulliparous women in Canada, with comparison with the United States and the United Kingdom. Professional guidelines recommend that age and parity should not be obstacles for receiving elective permanent contraception; however, many physicians hesitate to provide this procedure to young women because of the permanence of the procedure and the speculative possibility of regret. At the practice level, this means that there are barriers for young women to access elective sterilization; they are questioned or not taken seriously, or their desire for sterilization is more generally belittled by health care professionals. This article argues for further consideration of these requests and considers the ethical and legal issues that arise when preventing regret is prioritized over autonomy in medical practice. In Canada, there is a paucity of professional guidelines and articles offering practical considerations for handling such requests. Compared with the U.S. and U.K. policy contexts, we propose a patient-centered approach for practice to address requests for tubal sterilization that prioritizes informed consent and respect for patient autonomy. We ultimately aim to assure physicians that when the conditions of informed consent are met and documented, they practice within the limits of the law and in line with best ethical practice by respecting their patients' choice of contraceptive interventions and by ensuring their access to care.

Critics Say New State "Conscience Laws" Give Physicians Carte Blanche to Refuse Patients.

This Medical News feature discusses state laws that protect physicians who refuse to provide certain services because of religious or moral beliefs.

Harmonizing conscience claims and patient access to assisted death.

The rights of patients to receive legally permissible interventions sometimes conflict with enshrined rights of providers to object, for reasons of conscience, to providing those interventions. Getting the balance right is challenging. But reasonable balance to manage these conflicting imperatives can be achieved in the design of programs for assisted death. Rather than limiting the discourse to the platform of competing individual rights, health leaders are urged to consider the broader societal benefits and impacts of valuing conscience in the practice of medicine, the creation of regulation and policy, and the delivery of healthcare. A method to determine that conscience claims are "genuine," "reasonable," and "acceptable" needs developing. A list of criteria toward this determination is offered.

Institutional objection to abortion: A mixed-methods narrative review.

Institutional objection (IO) occurs when institutions providing health care claim objector status and refuse to provide legally permissible health services such as abortion. IO may be regulated by sources including law, ethical codes and policies (including State and local/institutional policies). We conducted a mixed-methods narrative review of the empirical evidence exploring IO to abortion provision globally, to inform areas for further research. MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), Global Health (CAB Abstracts), ScienceDirect and Scopus were searched in August 2021 using keywords including 'conscientious objection', 'faith-based organizations', 'religious hospitals' and 'abortion'. Eligible research focused on clinicians' attitudes and experiences of IO to abortion. The 28 studies included in the review were from nine countries: United States (19), Chile (2), Turkey (1), Argentina (1), Australia (1), Colombia (1), Ghana (1), Poland (1) and South Africa (1). The analysis demonstrated that IO was claimed in a range of countries, despite different legislative and policy frameworks. There was strong evidence from the United States that clinicians in religious healthcare institutions were less likely to provide abortions and abortion referrals, and that training of future abortion providers was negatively affected by IO. Qualitative evidence from other countries showed that IO was claimed by secular as well as religious institutions, and individual conscientious objection could be used as a mechanism for imposing IO. Further research is needed to explore whether IO is morally justified, how decisions are made to claim IO, and on what grounds. Finally, appropriate models for regulating IO are needed to ensure the protection of women's access to abortion. Such models could be informed by those used to regulate IO in other contexts, such as voluntary assisted dying.

The Impact of 'conscientious objection' on abortion-related outcomes: A synthesis of legal and health evidence.

The World Health Organization (WHO) and international human rights bodies have long urged states to take steps to ensure that 'conscientious objection' does not undermine access to abortion in practice. This review uses an established methodology to identify and integrate evidence of the health and human rights impacts of the practice of conscientious objection/refusal. The evidence identified in this review suggests strongly that conscientious objection negatively affects the rights of abortion seekers and has negative implications for the rights of non-objecting health workers. This is exacerbated in situations where an exercise of 'conscience' goes beyond 'opting out' of providing care and extends into seeking to prevent abortion through dissuasion, misinformation, misdirection, delay, and sometimes abuse. The insights from this review suggest that states must take better and further action to centre abortion seekers in the regulation of conscientious objection, and to prevent and ensure accountability for rights-limiting manifestations of conscience that go beyond opting out of direct provision of abortion care in non-emergency settings.

Perfil dos sobreviventes de violência sexual e factores associados ao abandono de seguimento de cuidados pós violência, nos centros integrados de atendimento do hospital geral josé macamo e hospital geral de mavalane entre 2019 e 2020 / Profile of survivors of sexual violence and factors associated with abandonment of follow-up of post-violence care, in the Integrated care centers of the José macamo general hospital and mavalane general hospital between 2019 and 2020

Introdução: A violência sexual afecta vários segmentos da sociedade e é um problema de saúde pública, que prejudica a saúde e o bem-estar de milhões de indivíduos no mundo. O seguimento pós violência sexual tem sido um dos maiores desafios enfrentados pelos profissionais de saúde, pois requer um cuidado, que não depende só do profissional, mas também dos sobreviventes. O estudo visa analisar o perfil dos sobreviventes de violência sexual e os factores associados ao abandono de cuidados pós violência sexual, no Hospital Geral José Macamo (HGJM) e Hospital Geral de Mavalane (HGM) entre 2019 e 2020. Métodos: Foi conduzido um estudo retrospectivo transversal, com uma abordagem quantitativa, no período entre Janeiro de 2019 à Dezembro 2020. Foram utilizados dados secundários colectados nas fichas de notificação e processos dos sobreviventes de violência sexual, atendidos nos Centros de Atendimento Integrado dos HGM e HGJM. Foram avaliados os casos de abandono e não abandono aos cuidados pós violência sexual com idade compreendida dos 2-56 anos. Para análise foi usado o pacote estatístico Stata 16.1, tendo se realizado análises de regressão logística e teste qui-quadrado. Resultados: No total foram revistas 318 fichas de notificação de sobreviventes de violência sexual, onde a maioria eram do sexo feminino 98% (313/318), com idades entre 2 a 56 anos, e mediana de idade de 15 anos (DP±8.3). Maior parte deles eram solteiros 97% (308/318) e residentes no distrito municipal Kamubukuane em 36% (114/318). Cerca de 55% (174/318) deles conheciam o seu agressor e a maior parte das agressões em 46% (147/318), ocorreram na casa do agressor…

Introduction: Sexual violence affects various segments of the society and it is a public health problem, which harms the health and well-being of millions of people in the world. Post sexual violence follow-up has been one of the biggest challenges faced by health professionals, as it requires care, which does not depend only on the professional, but also on the survivors. The study aims to analazy the profile of sexual violence survivors and factors associated with abandonment of post sexual violence care, at Jose Macamo General Hospital (JMGH) and Mavalane General Hospital (MGH) between 2019 and 2020. Methodology: A retrospective cross-sectional study with a quantitative approach was conducted in the period from January 2019 to December 2020. Secondary data collected from the notification forms and files of survivors of sexual violence, assisted at the Integrated Care Centres of HGM and HGJM, were used. Abandonment and non-abandonment cases to post sexual violence care aged 2-56 years were assessed. The statistical package Stata 16.1 was used for analysis, and logistic regression analysis and chi square test were performed. Results: A total of 318 notification forms of sexual violence survivors were reviewed, where majority were female 98% (313/318), aged between 2-56 years, and average age of 17 years (SD±8.3). Most of them were single 97% (308/318) and residing in Kamubukuane municipal district 36% (114/318). About 55% (174/318) of them knew their abuser and most of the assaults 46% (147/318) occurred at the abuser's home…

Kantian Conscientious Objection: A Reply to Kennett.

In her paper, "The cost of conscience: Kant on conscience and conscientious objection," Jeanette Kennett argues that a Kantian view of conscientious objection in medicine would bar physicians from refusing to perform certain practices based on conscience. I offer a response in the following manner: First, I reconstruct her main argument; second, I present a more accurate picture of Kant's view of conscience. I conclude that, given a Kantian framework, a physician should be allowed to refuse to perform practices that break the moral law and, thus, refuse practices that violate her conscience.

Dignity, conscience and religious pluralism in healthcare: An argument for a presumption in favour of respect for religious belief.

Religious pluralism in healthcare means that conflicts regarding appropriate treatment can occur because of convictions of patients and healthcare workers alike. This contribution argues for a presumption in favour of respect for religious belief on the basis that such convictions are judgements of conscience, and respect for conscience is core to what it means to respect human dignity. The human person is a subject in relation to all that is. Human dignity refers to the worth of human persons as members of the species with capacities of reason and free choice that enable the realisation of dignity as self-worth through morally good behaviour. Conscience is both a feature of inherent dignity and necessary for acquiring dignity as self-worth. Conscience enables a person to identify objective values and disvalues for human flourishing, the rational capacity to reason about the relative importance of these values and the right way to achieve them and the judgement of the good end and the right means. Human persons are bound to follow their conscience because this is their subjective relationship to objective truth. Religious convictions are decisions of conscience because they are subjective judgements about objective truth. The presumption of respect for religious belief is limited by the normative dimension of human dignity such that a person's beliefs may be overridden if they objectively violate inherent dignity or morally legitimate acquired dignity.

Philosophical Failure and the Reasonability View of Conscientious Objection: Can Reason Adjudicate Metaphysical or Religious Claims?

Robert Card has proposed a reasonability view of conscientious objection that asks providers to state the reasons for their objection for evaluation and approval by a review board. Jason Marsh has challenged Card to provide explicit criteria for what makes a conscientious objection reasonable, which he claims will be too difficult a task given that such objections often involve contentious metaphysical or religious claims. Card has responded by outlining standards by which a conscientious objection could be judged reasonable. In this paper, I extend Marsh's critique to key concepts in the standards outlined by Card such as abortifacient, harm, emergency, and discrimination, showing they can be given radically different interpretations given different metaphysical or religious presumptions. To resolve these conflicting interpretations, a reasonability view of conscientious objection will need more than the criteria outlined by Card, it will need the resources to evaluate the reasonability of metaphysical or religious claims.

Development of the Inclination Toward Conscientious Objection Scale for Physicians.

This study aims to develop a valid and reliable scale to assess whether a physician is inclined to take conscientious objection when asked to perform medical services that clash with his/her personal beliefs. The scale, named the Inclination toward Conscientious Objection Scale, was developed for physicians in Turkey. Face validity, content validity, criterion-related validity, and construct validity of the scale were evaluated in the development process. While measuring criterion-related validity, Student's t-test was used to identify the groups that did and did not show inclination toward conscientious objection. There were 126 items in the initial item pool, which reduced to 42 after content validity evaluation by five experts. After necessary adjustments, the scale was administered to 224 participants. Both exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were performed to investigate factor structure. The split-half method was employed to assess scale reliability, and the Spearman-Brown coefficient was calculated. Cronbach's alpha reliability coefficient was used to estimate the internal consistency of the scale items. The distinctiveness of the items was evaluated using Student's t-test. The lower and upper 27% groups were compared to assess the distinctiveness of the scale. The items were loaded on four factors that explained 85.46% of the variance: "Conscientious Objection - Medical Profession Relationship," "Conscientious Objection in Medical Education and Medical Practice," "Conscientious Objection with regard to the Concept of Rights" and "Conscientious Objection - Physician's Professional Identity and Role." The final scale has 40 items, and was found to be valid and reliable with high internal consistency.

Do Clinicians Have a Duty to Participate in Pragmatic Clinical Trials?

Clinicians have good moral and professional reasons to contribute to pragmatic clinical trials (PCTs). We argue that clinicians have a defeasible duty to participate in this research that takes place in usual care settings and does not involve substantive deviation from their ordinary care practices. However, a variety of countervailing reasons may excuse clinicians from this duty in particular cases. Yet because there is a moral default in favor of participating, clinicians who wish to opt out of this research must justify their refusal. Reasons to refuse include that the trial is badly designed in some way, that the trial activities will violate the clinician's conscience, or that the trial will impose excessive burdens on the clinician.