Conscientious object in nursing: Regulations and practice in two European countries.

BACKGROUND: The concept of conscientious objection is well described; however, because of its nature, little is known about real experiences of nursing professionals who apply objections in their practice. Extended roles in nursing indicate that clinical and value-based dilemmas are becoming increasingly common. In addition, the migration trends of the nursing workforce have increased the need for the mutual understanding of culturally based assumptions on aspects of health care delivery. AIM: To present (a) the arguments for and against conscientious objection in nursing practice, (b) a description of current regulations and practice regarding conscientious objection in nursing in Poland and the United Kingdom, and (c) to offer a balanced view regarding the application of conscientious objection in clinical nursing practice. DESIGN: Discussion paper. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS: Ethical guidelines has been followed at each stage of this study. FINDINGS: Strong arguments exist both for and against conscientious objection in nursing which are underpinned by empirical research from across Europe. Arguments against conscientious objection relate less to it as a concept, but rather in regard to organisational aspects of its application and different mechanisms which could be introduced in order to reach the balance between professional and patient's rights. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Debate regarding conscientious objection is vivid, and there is consensus that the right to objection among nurses is an important, acknowledged part of nursing practice. Regulation in the United Kingdom is limited to reproductive health, while in Poland, there are no specific procedures to which nurses can apply an objection. The same obligations of those who express conscientious objection apply in both countries, including the requirement to share information with a line manager, the patient, documentation of the objection and necessity to indicate the possibility of receiving care from other nurses. Using Poland and the United Kingdom as case study countries, this article offers a balanced view regarding the application of conscientious objection in clinical nursing practice.

Parental Refusal of Childhood Vaccines and Medical Neglect Laws.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the relation of vaccine refusal and medical neglect under child welfare laws. METHODS: We used the Westlaw legal database to search court opinions from 1905 to 2016 and identified cases in which vaccine refusal was the sole or a primary reason in a neglect proceeding. We also delineated if religious or philosophical exemptions from required school immunizations were available at the time of adjudication. RESULTS: Our search yielded 9 cases from 5 states. Most courts (7 of 9) considered vaccine refusal to constitute neglect. In the 4 cases decided in jurisdictions that permitted religious exemptions, courts either found that vaccine refusal did not constitute neglect or considered it neglect only in the absence of a sincere religious objection to vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: Some states have a legal precedent for considering parental vaccine refusal as medical neglect, but this is based on a small number of cases. Each state should clarify whether, under its laws, vaccine refusal constitutes medical neglect.

How Much Control Do Children and Adolescents Have over Genomic Testing, Parental Access to Their Results, and Parental Communication of Those Results to Others?

Adolescents may often have opinions about whether they want genetic and genomic testing in both the clinic and research and about who should have access to the results. This legal analysis demonstrates that the law provides very little protection to minors' wishes.

Ready or not? School preparedness for California's new personal beliefs exemption law.

OBJECTIVE: This paper describes elementary school officials' awareness of and preparedness for the implementation of California's new exemption law that went into effect on January 1, 2014. The new law prescribes stricter requirements for claiming a personal beliefs exemption from mandated school-entry immunizations. METHOD: We used cross-sectional data collected from a stratified random sample of 315 schools with low, middle, and high rates of personal beliefs exemptions. We described schools' awareness and specific knowledge of the new legislation and tested for differences across school types. We additionally tested for associations between outcome variables and school and respondent characteristics using ordered logit and negative binomial regression. Finally, we described schools' plans and needs for implementing the new legislation. RESULTS: Elementary school staff reported an overall low level of awareness and knowledge about the new legislation and could identify few of its features. We observed, however, that across the exemption-level strata, respondents from high-PBE schools reported significantly higher awareness, knowledge and feature identification compared to respondents from low-PBE schools. Multivariate analyses revealed only one significant association with awareness, knowledge and identification: respondent role. Support staff roles were associated with lower odds of having high self-rated awareness or knowledge compared to health workers, as well as with a reduced log count of features identified. Though most school officials were able to identify a communication plan, schools were still in need of resources and support for successful implementation, in particular, the need for information on the new law. CONCLUSION: Schools need additional information and support from state and local agencies in order to successfully implement and enforce California's new school immunization law. In particular, our results suggest the need to ensure information on the new law reaches all levels of school staff.

Rising rates of vaccine exemptions: problems with current policy and more promising remedies.

Parents of school-age children are increasingly claiming nonmedical exemptions to refuse vaccinations required for school entry. The resultant unvaccinated pockets in many areas of the country have been linked with outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases. Many states are now focused on reducing rates of nonmedical exemptions by making exemption processes more restrictive or burdensome for the exemptor. These strategies, however, pose ethical problems and may ultimately be inadequate. A shift to strategies that raise the financial liabilities of exemptors may lead to better success and prove ethically more sound. Potential areas of reform include tax law, health insurance, and private school funding programs. We advocate an approach that combines this type of incentive with more effective vaccination education.

Striking a balance: conscientious objection and reproductive health care from the Colombian perspective.

Conscientious Objection or conscientious refusal (CO) in access to reproductive health care is at the center of current legal debates worldwide. In countries such as the US and the UK, constitutional dilemmas surrounding CO in the context of reproductive health services reveal inadequate policy frameworks for balancing CO rights with women's rights to access contraception and abortion. The Colombian Constitutional Court's holistic jurisprudence regarding CO standards has applied international human rights norms so as to not only protect women's reproductive rights as fundamental rights, but to also introduce clear limits for the exercise of CO in health care settings. This paper reviews Latin American lines of regulation in Argentina, Uruguay, and Mexico City to argue that the Colombian Court's jurisprudence offers a strong guidance for future comprehensive policy approaches that aim to effectively balance tensions between CO and women's reproductive rights.

Conscientious objection and induced abortion in Europe.

The issue of conscientious objection (CO) arises in healthcare when doctors and nurses refuse to have any involvement in the provision of treatment of certain patients due to their religious or moral beliefs. Most commonly CO is invoked when it comes to induced abortion. Of the EU member states where induced abortion is legal, invoking CO is granted by law in 21 countries. The same applies to the non-EU countries Norway and Switzerland. CO is not legally granted in the EU member states Sweden, Finland, Bulgaria and the Czech Republic. The Icelandic legislation provides no right to CO either. European examples prove that the recommendation that CO should not prevent women from accessing services fails in a number of cases. CO puts women in an unequal position depending on their place of residence, socio-economic status and income. CO should not be presented as a question that relates only to health professionals and their rights. CO mainly concerns women as it has very real consequences for their reproductive health and rights. European countries should assess the laws governing CO and its effects on women's rights. CO should not be used as a subtle method for limiting the legal right to healthcare.

Exposure and vulnerability of California kindergarteners to intentionally unvaccinated children.

Widespread vaccination coverage among children is responsible for reducing or eliminating 14 serious childhood diseases in the United States. Despite this success, some parents remain concerned about the health effects of vaccines, and choose to keep their children unvaccinated. When population rates of vaccinations remain high enough, even unvaccinated children are protected because everyone around them is immune (so-called "herd immunity"). But clusters of unvaccinated children may threaten herd immunity and lead to increasing outbreaks of preventable diseases. This Issue Brief summarizes a new study that investigates the extent of such clustering, and quantifies the exposure of all California kindergartners to their intentionally unvaccinated schoolmates.

[About <> of vaccination]. / Sobre la <> de la Vacunación.

The debate over compulsory or merely recommended vaccination remains open, albeit latent, in those countries that have mandatory vaccine schedules. Despite the advantages of preventive immunization from the point of medical, economic and social features, it's clear, in the current status of medical ethics, that the exercise of patient autonomy calls for personal responsibility in the election of treatments and, in fact, the vaccines. Therefore, it is necessary to change the simple idea of prevention as <>, characteristic of a <> in order to pass to a preventative medicine concept that will be able to support the achievement of moral attitudes towards achieving the good <> for the individual and for the community. This is only possible from a <> wherever is possible to present an alternative between mandatory vs. recommendation from the concept of <> that, with the help of a series of measures, could combine the effective protection for the whole community with the responsible exercise of the personal autonomy.

Children of divorce: the differential diagnosis of contact refusal.

Contact refusal is a common phenomenon that can occur during the course of, or after, divorce, which affects the relationship between a child and the parent. This article defines the concept of contact refusal and discusses the importance of its recognition. The concept is further narrowed to focus on the child as the one refusing contact, not the parent, which can happen as well. Various types of contact refusals are illustrated in the article through clinical vignettes, and an approach to categorizing the various types of contact refusal is presented.

The psychosocial treatment of parental alienation.

Parental alienation occurs in divorces when one parent indoctrinates the child to dislike, fear, and avoid contact with the other parent. Mental health professionals who treat children and adolescents are likely to encounter victims of parental alienation in clinical practice, and it is important to identify and treat these youngsters earlier, when the condition is mild, rather than later, when the parental alienation is almost intractable. This article presents an overview of the treatment of parental alienation, which is called reunification therapy. All the parties involved in the case have a role in the prevention and treatment of parental alienation.

[Assessment of fitness for police custody: the physicians' responsibility and legal liability]. / Gewahrsamstauglichkeitsuntersuchung - Ärztliche Pflicht und rechtliche Verantwortung.

In contrast to several other European countries, German law provides only insufficient regulations on who is responsible for the medical assessment of persons in police custody. The police frequently report that doctors refuse to assess fitness for custody. Under consideration of the current legal background, we will discuss whether and, if so, which physicians can be obligated to carry out these assessments. We also examine a physician's possible exposure to criminal and civil liability if he or she refuses to assess fitness for custody or fails to render a correct assessment.

Normative consent and opt-out organ donation.

One way of increasing the supply of organs available for transplant would be to switch to an opt-out system of donor registration. This is typically assumed to operate on the basis of presumed consent, but this faces the objection that not all of those who fail to opt out would actually consent to the use of their cadaveric organs. This paper defuses this objection, arguing that people's actual, explicit or implicit, consent to use their organs is not needed. It borrows David Estlund's notion of 'normative consent' from the justification of political authority and applies it to the case of organ donation. According to this idea, when it is wrong to withhold consent to something, the moral force of that lack of consent may be null and void. If it is wrong of a person to refuse to donate their cadaveric organs to others, then it may be that their actual consent is not needed. This supports an opt-out system, which provides protection for those who have genuine reasons to refuse donation, and spares the worries as to what the deceased would actually have wanted.

Drunk driving, implied consent, and self-incrimination.

The effects of drunk driving are a significant risk to public health and safety. Accordingly, the federal government and the states have enacted laws that permit law enforcement to identify offenders and to apply various levels of sanctions. There is no constitutional requirement that evidence of drunkenness be permitted in defense of criminal behavior. In practice, citizens who undertake to operate motor vehicles under the influence of alcohol are considered reckless per se and have no right to obstruct law enforcement in determining their condition. Indeed, refusal of roadside sobriety tests, including the Breathalyzer, may be considered a separate offense. The issuing of Miranda-type warnings by police officers has been ruled on recently in New Jersey. In a superior court appellate decision, State v. Spell, the court outlined the necessary procedures, concluding that, although motorists have no right to refuse testing, police officers have an obligation to issue sufficient warnings before the motorist decides how to proceed. In the Spell matter, the defendant incriminated himself by refusing the testing, even though he was acquitted on the drunk-driving charge. The authors discuss the role of expert testimony in these matters.