Medical and midwifery students' views on the use of conscientious objection in abortion care, following legal reform in Chile: a cross-sectional study

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 Opinions of Specialists in Obstetrics and Gynecology on the Indications for Pregnancy Termination in Poland-A Preliminary Cross-Sectional Study

The physician's decision concerning pregnancy termination is influenced by a number of factors. The study aimed at obtaining the opinions of obstetricians and gynecologists with regard to the indications for pregnancy termination, the readiness to perform the procedure personally and the assessment of the determinants thereof. The survey study was conducted between 1 January 2020 and 31 December 2021 among physicians who performed diagnostic prenatal ultrasonography. A considerable majority of physicians participating in the study did not approve of termination without medical indications (62.5%). A marked majority of them considered the following cases as indications for pregnancy termination: severe fetal defects (90%), lethal defects (91.5%) and a disease threatening maternal life (91.5%). A small group of physicians declared that they were ready to perform a termination without medical indications (12.5%). However, they were ready to perform a pregnancy termination personally in cases of threat to maternal life (77.5%), severe fetal defects (75%), lethal fetal defects (75%) and a pregnancy being a result of rape (75%). No statistical significance was observed with regard to the influence of the respondents' sex, the fact of having children or the workplace on the issue of indications for pregnancy termination. It seems justified to develop case-centered counseling concerning abortion, based on specialists in perinatology, law and ethics, especially in countries with more restrictive abortion law or strongly religious societies.

"Obviously there is a conflict between confidentiality and what you are required to do by law": Chilean university faculty and student perspectives on reporting unlawful abortions

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

While Chile recently decriminalized abortion in cases of rape, lethal fetal anomaly, and to save a woman's life, most abortions are still criminalized. We assessed medical and midwifery school faculty and students' views on punishing and reporting people involved in unlawful abortion, and their understanding of their obligation to protect patient confidentiality and to report unlawful abortions.

METHODS

We interviewed 30 medical and midwifery school clinician faculty from seven public, private, secular and Catholic-affiliated universities, all located in the metropolitan region of Santiago, Chile. Medical (n = 239) and midwifery (n = 79) students at these same seven universities completed an online survey. We coded faculty interview transcripts, and analyzed codes related to maintaining patient confidentiality and reporting unlawful abortion. We summarized student views related to reporting and imprisoning people involved in unlawful abortion, and used general estimating equation (GEE) models to identify the factors associated with support for criminalization.

RESULTS

Faculty and students generally did not support reporting or imprisoning anyone involved in an unlawful abortion and believed that protecting patient information takes precedence over reporting. Yet, faculty described pressures to report in the public sector and several cases where they or their colleagues were involved in reports. Most students somewhat/strongly agreed (78%) that patient information concerning an unlawful abortion should be kept confidential; 35% strongly/somewhat agreed that a clinician involved in an unlawful surgical abortion should be imprisoned, and 18% agreed that the woman involved should be imprisoned, with students from secular universities being significantly less likely to support reporting and punishing people involved in unlawful abortion, than students from Catholic universities.

DISCUSSION

There is a need to clarify clinicians' ethical obligations in abortion care, in particular in Catholic universities, so that they can ensure that their patients have access to high quality confidential health care services.