1
|
Schaaf M, Lavelanet A, Codjia L, Nihlén Å, Rehnstrom Loi U. A narrative review of challenges related to healthcare worker rights, roles and responsibilities in the provision of sexual and reproductive services in health facilities. BMJ Glob Health 2023; 8:e012421. [PMID: 37918835 PMCID: PMC10626880 DOI: 10.1136/bmjgh-2023-012421] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/28/2023] [Accepted: 10/07/2023] [Indexed: 11/04/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION This paper identifies and summarises tensions and challenges related to healthcare worker rights and responsibilities and describes how they affect healthcare worker roles in the provision of sexual and reproductive health (SRH) care in health facilities. METHOD The review was undertaken in a two-phase process, namely: (1) development of a list of core constructs and concepts relating to healthcare worker rights, roles and responsibilities to guide the review and (2) literature review. RESULT A total of 110 papers addressing a variety of SRH areas and geographical locations met our inclusion criteria. These papers addressed challenges to healthcare worker rights, roles and responsibilities, including conflicting laws, policies and guidelines; pressure to achieve coverage and quality; violations of the rights and professionalism of healthcare workers, undercutting their ability and motivation to fulfil their responsibilities; inadequate stewardship of the private sector; competing paradigms for decision-making-such as religious beliefs-that are inconsistent with professional responsibilities; donor conditionalities and fragmentation; and, the persistence of embedded practical norms that are at odds with healthcare worker rights and responsibilities. The tensions lead to a host of undesirable outcomes, ranging from professional frustration to the provision of a narrower range of services or of poor-quality services. CONCLUSION Social mores relating to gender and sexuality and other contested domains that relate to social norms, provider religious identity and other deeply held beliefs complicate the terrain for SRH in particular. Despite the particularities of SRH, a whole of systems response may be best suited to address embedded challenges.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marta Schaaf
- Department of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research and UNDP-UNFPA-UNICEF-WHO-World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP), World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Antonella Lavelanet
- Department of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research and UNDP-UNFPA-UNICEF-WHO-World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP), World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Laurence Codjia
- Department of Health Workforce, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Åsa Nihlén
- Department of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research and UNDP-UNFPA-UNICEF-WHO-World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP), World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Ulrika Rehnstrom Loi
- Department of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research and UNDP-UNFPA-UNICEF-WHO-World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP), World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Merner B, Haining CM, Willmott L, Savulescu J, Keogh LA. Institutional objection to abortion: A mixed-methods narrative review. WOMEN'S HEALTH (LONDON, ENGLAND) 2023; 19:17455057231152373. [PMID: 36785871 PMCID: PMC10071095 DOI: 10.1177/17455057231152373] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/15/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bronwen Merner
- Centre for Health Equity, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia
| | - Casey M Haining
- Centre for Health Equity, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia
| | - Lindy Willmott
- Australian Centre for Health Law Research, Faculty of Business and Law, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| | - Julian Savulescu
- The Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.,Centre for Biomedical Ethics, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.,Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, VIC, Australia.,The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia
| | - Louise A Keogh
- Centre for Health Equity, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Zaręba K, La Rosa VL, Wójtowicz S, Kołb-Sielecka E, Banasiewicz J, Ciebiera M, Jakiel G. The Opinions of Specialists in Obstetrics and Gynecology on the Indications for Pregnancy Termination in Poland-A Preliminary Cross-Sectional Study. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2022; 19:12578. [PMID: 36231879 PMCID: PMC9564862 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph191912578] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/01/2022] [Revised: 09/25/2022] [Accepted: 09/29/2022] [Indexed: 06/16/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kornelia Zaręba
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, College of Medicine and Health Sciences (CMHS), United Arab Emirates University (UAEU), Al Ain 17666, United Arab Emirates
| | - Valentina Lucia La Rosa
- Unit of Psychodiagnostics and Clinical Psychology, University of Catania, 95124 Catania, Italy
| | - Stanisław Wójtowicz
- Department of Medical Psychology and Medical Communication, Medical University of Warsaw, 02-091 Warsaw, Poland
| | - Ewelina Kołb-Sielecka
- First Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Center of Postgraduate Medical Education, 01-813 Warsaw, Poland
| | - Jolanta Banasiewicz
- Department of Medical Psychology and Medical Communication, Medical University of Warsaw, 02-091 Warsaw, Poland
| | - Michał Ciebiera
- Second Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Center of Postgraduate Medical Education, 01-813 Warsaw, Poland
| | - Grzegorz Jakiel
- First Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Center of Postgraduate Medical Education, 01-813 Warsaw, Poland
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Davis JM, Haining CM, Keogh LA. A narrative literature review of the impact of conscientious objection by health professionals on women's access to abortion worldwide 2013-2021. Glob Public Health 2022; 17:2190-2205. [PMID: 35129083 DOI: 10.1080/17441692.2021.2020318] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/04/2022]
Abstract
Conscientious objection to provide abortion has been enshrined in laws and policies globally. Insufficient attention has been paid to the direct and indirect ways in which conscientious objection compromises women's access to a lawful abortion. Using a systematic search strategy, this narrative literature review synthesises the literature exploring conscientious objection's impact on women's access to abortion in a range of countries. This narrative literature review builds on an extensive literature review published by Chavkin et al. (2013. Conscientious objection and refusal to provide reproductive healthcare: A white paper examining prevalence, health consequences, and policy responses. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, 123, S41-S56. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-7292(13)60002-8). Searches were undertaken on the Medline (Ovid), Global Health, CINAHL, Scopus and Science Direct databases. Thirty six papers were included for thematic analysis. Conscientious objection to abortion was found to impact women's access to abortion at three main levels: the practitioner level, the healthcare system level and the sociocultural environment level. Conscientious objection was found to impact access directly through attempts by health professionals to restrict access, and indirectly by exacerbating pre-existing barriers to access. Further research is required to better quantify the extent to which this impacts women and whether interventions are effective in reducing the barriers that conscientious objection creates and exacerbates.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jasmine Meredith Davis
- Centre for Health Equity, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.,Melbourne Medical School, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Casey Michelle Haining
- Centre for Health Equity, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Louise Anne Keogh
- Centre for Health Equity, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| |
Collapse
|