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.

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.

[Abortion in Melilla: barriers to ocean and frontier]

OBJECTIVE

To provide insights into the challenges faced by women seeking abortion services in Melilla, Spain. It seeks to describe the journey these women undertake and to identify and analyze the barriers they encounter in accessing abortion care.

METHOD

A qualitative research approach was employed, involving a series of eight semi-structured interviews during 2022. Three interviews were conducted with national experts in the field of abortion, while five interviews were conducted with healthcare professionals from the Melilla Health Area who are directly involved in providing abortion services and supporting women throughout the process. The study was guided by a theoretical framework that focuses on barriers to abortion access and sexual and reproductive rights. The collected data was analyzed using content analysis and categorized based on key dimensions of the study.

RESULTS

The study identified several significant barriers to abortion care access in Melilla. These include conscientious objection among healthcare providers, the geographical remoteness of Melilla, the legal challenges faced by Moroccan women due to their irregular status, and the requirement of parental consent for minors aged 16 and 17. Consequently, women seeking abortion services are forced to travel to mainland Spain, continue with undesired pregnancies, or resort to unsafe clandestine abortions in Morocco, thereby endangering their lives in the worst cases.

CONCLUSIONS

The barriers to abortion access identified in this study represent a violation of women's reproductive rights in Melilla. Urgent action is required to review the current process, ensuring that access is improved and the right to safe abortion is guaranteed for all women residing in Melilla.

Objections to assisted dying within institutions: systemic solutions for rapprochement

In this Matters Arising article, we outline how the recent article "The impact on patients of objections by institutions to assisted dying: a qualitative study of family caregivers' perceptions" (White et al., 2023 Mar 13;24(1):22) informed Voluntary Assisted Dying (VAD) implementation in our large Australian public health setting, where objections do not emanate from, but within, the institution. In reporting the harms to patients and caregivers created by institutional objection, White et al. provide an evidenced-based road map for potential potholes or risks associated with VAD implementation. We discuss the complexities emerging from the diverse views of health professionals and the ethical tensions arising from such, especially within certain specialties, and how we developed systemic strategies that support patients, caregivers and staff alike. We highlighted the need to shift from "Do you support VAD?" to "How can we support you as healthcare professionals to integrate VAD into your practice, in a way that complies with the legislation, meets the needs of patients and caregivers, and feels safe and does not compromise your moral stance?"

Perceptions and experiences of female nurses when confronted with expressing a conscientious objection towards end-of-life care in Greece

BACKGROUND

Conscientious objection in nursing has been a topic of much discussion in recent years. Healthcare providers' conscientious objection has been included in Greek legislation. However, little is known about the real experiences of nurses who want to apply conscientious objections in their practice. This study aimed to contribute to filling that gap.

METHODS

This qualitative study was conducted with eighteen experienced female nurses. Data were collected through semi-structured in-depth qualitative interviews conducted with purposively selected nurses during the period from October 2019 to January 2020. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically. The ethical principles of anonymity, voluntary participation and confidentiality were considered.

RESULTS

Eight major themes and seven subthemes emerged from the thematic data analysis. Oppressive behaviors in the workplace and subservient interactions between nurses and physicians, suboptimal communication and inadequate support of nurses, perceived ineffectiveness of nurses' conscientious objections, missing legal protection against job insecurity, provision of care labeled 'futile', nurses' false knowledge and perceptions on medical situations related to conscientious objections, nurses' fears of isolation bullying and negative gossip in the workplace and a trivial amount of nurses' involvement in medical decisions emerged as barriers to nurses raising conscientious objection. Furthermore, from data analysis, it emerged that some nurses had false knowledge and perceptions on medical situations related to conscientious objections, some nurses experienced mild uncertainty distress about their ethical concerns, nurses considered their remote contribution as participation that can give rise to conscientious objection, a collective conscientious objection raised by nurses might have increased chances of being effective, and upbringing, childhood experiences, education and religion are factors shaping the nurses' core values.

CONCLUSION

A total of fifteen themes and subthemes emerged from this study. Most of the findings of this study were previously unknown or undervalued and might be helpful to inform nurses and nursing managers or leaders as well as healthcare policy makers. The results of this study might contribute to addressing the need for creating ethically sensitive health care services and ensuring nurses' moral integrity and high quality of patient care.

A qualitative study of experiences of institutional objection to medical assistance in dying in Canada: ongoing challenges and catalysts for change

BACKGROUND

In June 2016, Canada legalized medical assistance in dying (MAiD). From the outset, some healthcare institutions (including faith-based and non-faith-based hospitals, hospices, and residential aged care facilities) have refused to allow aspects of MAiD onsite, resulting in patient transfers for MAiD assessments and provision. There have been media reports highlighting the negative consequences of these "institutional objections", however, very little research has examined their nature and impact.

METHODS

This study reports on findings from 48 semi-structured qualitative interviews conducted with MAiD assessors and providers, MAiD team members (working to coordinate care and lead MAiD programs in institutions and health authorities), and family caregivers on their experiences with institutional objection. Participants were recruited from the Canadian provinces of British Columbia, Ontario, and Nova Scotia. Data were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Themes identified were: (1) basis for institutional objection (with objections commonly rooted in religious values and a particular philosophy of palliative care); (2) scope of objection (demonstrating a wide range of practices objected to); (3) lack of transparency regarding institutional position; (4) impacts on patients; (5) impacts on health practitioners; and (6) catalysts for change. Participants reported that many institutions' objections had softened over time, lessening barriers to MAiD access and adverse impacts on patients and health practitioners. Participants attributed this positive change to a range of catalysts including advocacy by health practitioners and family members, policymaking by local health authorities, education, and relationship building. Nevertheless, some institutions, particularly faith-based ones, retained strong objections to MAiD, resulting in forced transfers and negative emotional and psychological impacts on patients, family members, and health practitioners.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper adds to the limited evidence base about the impacts of institutional objection and can inform practical and regulatory solutions in Canada and abroad. Reform is needed to minimize the negative impacts on patients, their caregivers, and health practitioners involved in MAiD practice.

The missing voices in the conscientious objection debate: British service users' experiences of conscientious objection to abortion

BACKGROUND

The fourth section of the 1967 Abortion Act states that individuals (including health care practitioners) do not have to participate in an abortion if they have a conscientious objection. A conscientious objection is a refusal to participate in abortion on the grounds of conscience. This may be informed by religious, moral, philosophical, ethical, or personal beliefs. Currently, there is very little investigation into the impact of conscientious objection on service users in Britain. The perspectives of service users are imperative in understanding the real-world consequences and potential impact of conscientious objection and should be considered when creating and reviewing policies and guidelines. This research provided a platform for women and those who can become pregnant to share their experiences and opinions at a time when these voices are largely excluded in the great tradition of Western political philosophy and law-making processes.

METHOD

Five service users were interviewed using a narrative interview approach to uncover their abortion journeys and experiences of conscientious objection.

FINDINGS

The findings were presented as found poems and uncovered that doctors are not always: informing service users that they have a conscientious objection to abortion, giving service users enough information to access abortion (indirect referral), treating them non-judgmentally, and providing medically correct information. Service users did not experience burdens such as long waiting times and were still able to access legal abortion. However, service users did experience negative emotional effects, as they were often left feeling scared, angry, and hopeless when they were not referred and/or were mistreated.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings indicate that conscientious objection could work in practice. However, it is currently failing some individuals on an emotional level, as not all doctors are adhering to guidelines. Conscientious objection in Britain needs to be addressed, to ensure service users receive fair, impartial, non-judgmental care.

Professional responsibility, nurses, and conscientious objection: A framework for ethical evaluation

Conscientious objections (CO) can be disruptive in a variety of ways and may disadvantage patients and colleagues who must step-in to assume care. Nevertheless, nurses have a right and responsibility to object to participation in interventions that would seriously harm their sense of integrity. This is an ethical problem of balancing risks and responsibilities related to patient care. Here we explore the problem and propose a nonlinear framework for exploring the authenticity of a claim of CO from the perspective of the nurse and of those who must evaluate such claims. We synthesized the framework using Rest's Four Component Model of moral reasoning along with tenets of the International Council of Nursing's (ICN) Code of Ethics for Nurses and insights from relevant ethics and nursing ethics literature. The resulting framework facilitates evaluating potential consequences of a given CO for all involved. We propose that the framework can also serve as an aid for nurse educators as they prepare students for practice. Gaining clarity about the sense in which the concept of conscience provides a defensible foundation for objecting to legally, or otherwise ethically, permissible actions, in any given case is critical to arriving at an ethical and reasonable plan of action.

Understanding Conscientious Objection and the Acceptability of its Practice in Primary Care

Ethically challenging or controversial medical procedures have prompted increasing requests for the exercise of conscientious objection, and caused concerns about how and when it should be practised. This paper clarifies definitions, especially with regard to discrimination, and explores the restrictions, duties, and practical limitations, in order to suggest criteria for its practice. It also argues that a conscientious refusal to treat, where there is therapeutic doubt, is a valid form of conscientious objection. An email survey sent to General Practitioners (GPs), explored the adherence to the suggested criteria, and assessed the outcomes, in terms of acceptability, impact, and difficulties experienced by the GPs, their colleagues and their patients. The results demonstrate high acceptability of conscientious objection, and better outcomes when the suggested criteria are adhered to. The GPs would support education to improve the practice of conscientious objection to a professional level, which could further improve outcomes and acceptability.

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.

Perception of abortion in first-year students of the Faculty of Medicine after the Human Embryology course

BACKGROUND

Multiple studies have been recorded regarding the perception of abortion among students in the health area.

OBJECTIVE

To know if medical-scientific training is sufficient to generate a change in the perception of first-year students of the National Autonomous University of Mexico Faculty of Medicine.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was applied in two times, with the level of relationship between the items of each dimension being analyzed using Cramer's V test. The results were compared to analyze if there was a change in the perception of abortion after the human embryology course.

RESULTS

With an initial population of 2,150 students, 393 pre-course and 394 post-course surveys were conducted. The results indicated that despite the existence of changes in the perception of Faculty of Medicine students with regard to abortion, they are not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The medical-scientific training provided by the human embryology course is not enough to provide foundations to the perception of students on issues such as abortion or conscientious objection.

Democratizing Conscientious Refusal in Healthcare

Settling the debate over conscientious refusal (CR) in liberal democracies requires us to develop a conception of the healthcare provider's moral role. Because CR claims and resulting policy changes take place in specific sociopolitical contexts with unique histories and diverse polities, the method we use for deriving the healthcare norms should itself be a democratic, context-dependent inquiry. To this end, I begin by describing some prerequisites-which I call publicity conditions-for any democratic account of healthcare norms that conflict or jibe with CR. Next, drawing on Ronald Dworkin's jurisprudence and Tom Beauchamp & James Childress's approach to bioethical reasoning, I briefly introduce one method for generating healthcare norms that is faithful to the publicity conditions and has potential to constructively, and democratically, derive important boundaries for CR. Finally, I argue that many critics of CR fail to similarly ground their accounts of healthcare norms in healthcare professionals' sociopolitical contexts, often relying instead on their own interpretation of a generally stateable healthcare norm. This leads to their misconstruing both the value judgments on which their own approaches rest and the public, political values that are often invoked in favor of CR.

Attitudes of Polish physicians, nurses and pharmacists towards the ethical and legal aspects of the conscience clause

BACKGROUND

While healthcare professionals' right to invoke the conscience clause has been recognised as a fundamental human right, it continues to provoke a heated debate in Polish society. Although public discourse is filled with ethical and legal considerations on the conscience clause, much less is known about the attitudes of healthcare professionals regarding that matter. The aim of this study was therefore to describe the attitudes of Polish physicians, nurses and pharmacists towards the ethical and legal aspects of the conscience clause.

METHODS

We analysed a group of three hundred healthcare professionals: physicians, nurses and pharmacists in Poznan, Poland, using a standard questionnaire comprising of 29 questions about various ethical and legal aspects of the conscience clause and participants' personal experiences with the conscience clause. The study was conducted between January and March 2020.

RESULTS

This research shows that although most Polish healthcare workers support the right to invoke the conscience clause they differ significantly in their opinions on to whom and to what medical procedures the conscience clause should apply to. It also demonstrated that while the conscience clause is rarely invoked in Poland, most healthcare professionals declare that the current legal regulations in that sphere are unclear and inaccurate.

CONCLUSIONS

While there is an urgent need to raise the awareness regarding the conscience clause among medical students and healthcare professionals and educate them about such issues, it is even more important to improve the legal system in regard to the CC so that it protects both HCPs' right to the CC and safeguards patients' rights to medical services.

It's about finding a balance…exploring conscientious objection to abortion with UK midwives

BACKGROUND

Despite the right for health professionals to abstain from providing abortion services existing for over 50 years, literature on conscientious objection to abortion scarcely mentions midwives. In addition, little empirical research has been carried out concerning midwives' views surrounding what constitutes participation in abortion and in turn, what areas of care they can withdraw from.

AIM

To explore midwives' beliefs regarding the extent of and limitations to the exercising of their legal right to objection to abortion on conscience grounds.

DESIGN

Qualitative study with 17 midwives in Glasgow and Liverpool, UK.

METHOD

Face to face semi-structured interviews, transcribed verbatim and analysed using a thematic analysis and Human Rights framework for midwifery care.

FINDINGS

The extent of and limitations to CO to abortion-related care was reflected in four themes: respecting and protecting, making informed decisions, providing non-discriminatory care and experience and culture. There was an overriding sense of support for midwives to be able to exercise their right to conscientious objection, how this is operationalised in practice however continues to be fraught with complexity, which in turn poses constant challenges to midwives who object, their colleagues and managers.

CONCLUSIONS

Midwives' beliefs regarding the exercising of their legal right to object to abortion-related care on conscience grounds can be summarized in the challenge of "finding a balance". A national picture of how to accommodate CO to abortion is needed, so that all midwives can continue to give optimal care to women and receive it themselves, within a human rights framework.

The Reasonableness Standard for Conscientious Objection in Healthcare

In complex, pluralistic societies, different views concerning the moral duties of healthcare professionals inevitably exist: according to some accounts, doctors can and should cooperate in performing abortion or physician-assisted suicide, while according to others they should always defend human life and protect their patients' health. It is argued that the very plurality of responses presently given to questions such as these provides a liberal argument in favour of conscientious objection (CO), as an attempt to deal with moral diversity by protecting both the professionals' claim to moral integrity and the patients' claim to receive lawful and safe medical treatments. A moderate view on CO is defended, according to which none of these claims can be credited with unconditional value. Claims to CO by healthcare professionals can be justified but must be subjected to a reasonableness standard. Both the incompatibility of CO with the medical profession and its unconditional sanctioning by conscience absolutism are therefore rejected. The paper contributes to the definition of the conditions of such reasonableness, particularly by stressing the role played by conceptions of good medicine in discriminating claims to CO; it is argued that respecting these conditions prevents from having the negative consequences dreaded by critics. The objection according to which accepting the physician's duty to inform and refer is inconsistent with the professed value of moral integrity is also discussed.

Nurses' attitudes toward, perceptions of, and experiences with conscientious objection

BACKGROUND

Conscientious objection is a person's refusal to fulfill a legal duty due to their ethical values, religious beliefs, or ideological affiliations. In nursing, it refers to a nurse's refusal to perform an action or participate in a particular situation based on their conscience. Conscientious objection has become a highly contested topic in recent years.

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

This study had four objectives: (1) eliciting information on how Turkish nurses perceive conscientious objection, (2) revealing whether their moral beliefs affect the care they provide, (3) determining their experiences with conscientious objection, and (4) identifying existing or potential issues of conscientious objection.

RESEARCH DESIGN

This qualitative study collected data through semi-structured interviews. The data were analyzed using thematic content analysis.

PARTICIPANTS

The sample consisted of 21 nurses.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

The study was approved by an ethics committee. Confidentiality and anonymity were guaranteed. Participation was voluntary.

FINDINGS

The analysis revealed four themes: (1) universal values of nursing (professional values), (2) experiences with conscientious objection (refusing to provide care/not providing care), (3) possible effects of conscientious objection (positive and negative), and (4) scope of conscientious objection (grounded and groundless).

CONCLUSION

Participants did not want to provide care due to (1) patient characteristics or (2) their own religious and moral beliefs. Participants stated that conscientious objection should be limited in the case of moral dilemmas and accepted only if the healthcare team agreed on it. Further research is warranted to define conscientious objection and determine its possible effects, feasibility, and scope in Turkey.

A narrative literature review of the impact of conscientious objection by health professionals on women's access to abortion worldwide 2013-2021

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.

"I haven't had to bare my soul but now I kind of have to": describing how voluntary assisted dying conscientious objectors anticipated approaching conversations with patients in Victoria, Australia

BACKGROUND

Dealing with end of life is challenging for patients and health professionals alike. The situation becomes even more challenging when a patient requests a legally permitted medical service that a health professional is unable to provide due to a conflict of conscience. Such a scenario arises when Victorian health professionals, with a conscientious objection (CO) to voluntary assisted dying (VAD), are presented with patients who request VAD or merely ask about VAD. The Voluntary Assisted Dying Act 2017 (Vic) recognizes the inherent conflict of conscience that may arise for some health professionals when asked to provide VAD and responds by affording broad protection to conscientious objectors who wish to refuse to take part in the VAD process.

METHODS

Seventeen semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with Victorian health professionals with a self-identified CO to VAD in the lead-up to the implementation of VAD in Victoria. Interviews explored how participants anticipated they would manage their CO in practice. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed thematically.

RESULTS

Our results reveal that the way in which health professionals claimed they would approach CO conversations is variable and was dependant on the strength of their opposition to VAD. We categorized conscientious objectors according to their approach as either dissuasive non-referrers, passive non-referrers, facilitators or negotiators. Our study also explores the perceived difficulties of exercising one's CO as identified by our participants.

CONCLUSION

The broad protection offered by the Voluntary Assisted Dying Act 2017 (Vic) encourages a range of behaviors from conscientious objectors, due to the minimal obligations imposed. In order to assist conscientious objectors, more policy, institutional guidance, and education needs to be available to conscientious objectors explicitly addressing how to effectively manage one's CO. Such guidance is imperative to ensuring that their moral integrity is preserved and that they are exercising their CO appropriately.

Factors influencing practitioners' who do not participate in ethically complex, legally available care: scoping review

Background

Evolving medical technology, advancing biomedical and drug research, and changing laws and legislation impact patients’ healthcare options and influence healthcare practitioners’ (HCPs’) practices. Conscientious objection policy confusion and variability can arise as it may occasionally be unclear what underpins non-participation. Our objective was to identify, analyze, and synthesize the factors that influenced HCPs who did not participate in ethically complex, legally available healthcare.

Methods

We used Arksey and O’Malley’s framework while considering Levac et al.’s enhancements, and qualitatively synthesized the evidence. We searched Medline, CINAHL, JSTOR, EMBASE, PsychINFO, Sociological Abstracts, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global from January 1, 1998, to January 15, 2020, and reviewed the references of the final articles. We included articles written in English that discussed the factors that influenced physicians and registered nurses (RNs) who did not participate in end-of-life (EOL), reproductive technology and health, genetic testing, and organ or tissue donation healthcare areas. Using Covidence, we conducted title and abstract screening, followed by full-text screening against our eligibility criteria. We extracted the article’s data into a spreadsheet, analyzed the articles, and completed a qualitative content analysis using NVivo12.

Results

We identified 10,664 articles through the search, and after the screening, 16 articles were included. The articles sampled RNs (n = 5) and physicians (n = 11) and encompassed qualitative (n = 7), quantitative (n = 7), and mixed (n = 2) methodologies. The care areas included reproductive technology and health (n = 11), EOL (n = 3), organ procurement (n = 1), and genetic testing (n = 1). One article included two care areas; EOL and reproductive health. The themed factors that influenced HCPs who did not participate in healthcare were: (1) HCPs’ characteristics, (2) personal beliefs, (3) professional ethos, 4) emotional labour considerations, and (5) system and clinical practice considerations.

Conclusion

The factors that influenced HCPs’ who did not participate in ethically complex, legally available care are diverse. There is a need to recognize conscientious objection to healthcare as a separate construct from non-participation in healthcare for reasons other than conscience. Understanding these separate constructs will support HCPs’ specific to the underlying factors influencing their practice participation.

Commentary: Special Issue on Conscientious Objection

This special issue of HEC Forum includes articles on a wide range of specific topics that make significant contributions to conscientious objection scholarship. In this commentary, it is not feasible to provide a comprehensive analysis of each of the articles; and I have not attempted to do so. Instead, for each article, I have selected specific issues and arguments on which to comment.

Conscientious Objection, Not Refusal: The Power of a Word

Conscientious objection (CO) in medicine grew out of the need to protect healthcare providers who objected to performing abortions after the Roe v. Wade decision in the 1970s which has since over time expanded to include sterilization, contraception, in vitro fertilization, stem cell research, and end-of-life issues. Since 2006, there has been a growing amount of published literature arguing for the denial of CO. Over the last three years, there has also been an increase in calling this conscientious refusal. This article will argue that the term conscientious objection is more accurate than conscientious refusal because those who object are not refusing to provide care. CO also emphasizes that there are reasoned arguments behind one's decision not to perform certain actions because of one's own principles and values.

SUMMARY

How something is presented matters. Objection emphasizes the thought behind the action while refusal gives the impression that medical care is not given.

Conscientious objection to medical assistance in dying in rural/remote nursing

In 2016, the Supreme Court of Canada legalized medical assistance in dying in Canada. Similar to jurisdictions where this has been a more long-standing option for end-of-life care, the Supreme Court's decision in Canada included a caveat that no healthcare provider could be compelled to participate in medical assistance in dying. The Canadian Nurses Association, in alignment with numerous ethical guidelines for healthcare providers around the globe, maintains that nurses may opt out of participation in medical assistance in dying if they conscientiously object to this procedure. The realities of implementing medical assistance in dying are still unfolding. One area that has received little attention in the literature thus far is the ability of nurses who aid with, rather than administer, medical assistance in dying to conscientiously object. This is particularly significant in rural and remote areas of Canada where geographic dispersion and limited numbers of nursing staff create conditions that limit the ability to transfer care or call on a designated team. Exercising conscientious objection to medical assistance in dying in rural and remote areas, by way of policies developed with an urban focus, is one example of how the needs of rural nurses and patients may not be met, leading to issues of patient access to medical assistance in dying and retention of nursing staff. To illustrate the complexities of nurses' conscientious objection to medical assistance in dying in a rural setting, we apply an ethical decision-making framework to a hypothetical case scenario and discuss the potential consequences and implications for future policy. Realizing that conscientious objection may not be a viable option in a rural or remote context has implications for not only medical assistance in dying, but other ethically sensitive healthcare services as well. These considerations have implications for policy in other jurisdictions allowing or considering medically assisted deaths, as well as other rural and remote areas where nurses may face ethical dilemmas.

Considerations of Conscience

The proper role of conscience in healthcare continues to be a topic of deep interest for bioethicists, healthcare professionals, and health policy experts. This issue of HEC Forum brings together a collection of articles about features of these ongoing discussions of conscience, advancing the conversations about conscience in healthcare from a variety of perspectives and on a variety of fronts. Some articles in this issue take up particularly challenging cases of conscientious objection in practice, such as Fleming, Frith, and Ramsayer's contextually rich piece on midwives in Scotland or Harter's professionally grounded analysis; others engage the changing institutional landscapes which impact considerations of conscience, such as Cummins' work on the role of employers in institutional policies about conscience and Ben Moshe's discussion of publicity and institutional committees. Pieces by Howard and Pilkington both raise conceptual considerations about how we think about the role of conscience in medicine, questioning the use of "conscientious objection" in these discussions, and Byrnes pushes back on the most influential work in this area by Mark Wicclair. The issue concludes with a piece by Wicclair, which engages each of these distinct offerings, further extending the discussions of conscience in healthcare and helpfully connecting key themes discussed by authors in this issue to his contributions and to the longer tradition of discussions of conscience in medicine. This issue challenges readers to engage different arguments from different perspectives and asks them-in some cases-to be open to revising how they think about the role of conscience and the existence of and justification for conscientious objection in the dynamic, interdisciplinary fields of healthcare.

Understanding the Reasons Behind Healthcare Providers' Conscientious Objection to Voluntary Assisted Dying in Victoria, Australia

During the debates about the legalization of Voluntary Assisted Dying (VAD) in Victoria, Australia, the presence of anti-VAD health professionals in the medical community and reported high rates of conscientious objection (CO) to VAD suggested access may be limited. Most empirical research on CO has been conducted in the sexual and reproductive health context. However, given the fundamental differences in the nature of such procedures and the legislation governing it, these findings may not be directly transferable to VAD. Accordingly, we sought to understand how CO operates in the context of VAD. Prior to the implementation of the VAD legislation in June 2019, we conducted semi-structured interviews with seventeen health professionals with a self-declared CO to VAD, to explore what motivated their CO. Participants identified multiple motivations, which can be broadly categorized as: concerns for oneself; concerns for patients; concerns about the current Victorian legislation; and concerns for the medical profession. Participants' moral commitments included personal, professional, and political commitments. In some cases, one's CO was specific to Victoria's current legislation rather than VAD more broadly. Our findings suggest CO motivations extend beyond those traditionally cited and suggest a need to better understand and manage CO in the healthcare context.

Conscientious objection and LGBTQ discrimination in the United States

Given recent legal developments in the United States, now is a critical time to draw attention to how 'conscientious objection' is sometimes used by health care providers to discriminate against the LGBTQ community. We review legal developments from 2019 and present several cases where health care providers used conscientious objection in ways that discriminate against the LGBTQ community, resulting in damaged trust by this underserved population. We then discuss two important conceptual points in this debate. The first involves the interpretation of discrimination (provider versus patient-centered views), and we argue for a patient-centered view; the second involves the use of the people versus procedure distinction to reach a compromise between LGBTQ individuals and the clinicians who do not want to treat them. We argue the distinction is problematic when applied to treatment of the LGBTQ population.

Sweden redefine the notions of care before freedom of conscience?

PURPOSE

The article aims to elaborate on two recent European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) decisions which have rejected, on grounds of non-admissibility, the appeals by two Swedish midwives who refused to carry out abortion-related services, basing their refusal on conscientious objection, and to expound upon the legal and ethical underpinnings and core standards applied to the framing process of such a ECtHR decision.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

By drawing upon relevant recommendations from international institutions, the authors have aimed to assess how the ECtHR rationale could affect the balance between CO and patient rights; searches have been conducted up until December 2020.

RESULTS

In both decisions the European Court has asserted that the right to exercise conscientious objection must give way to the protection of the right to health of women seeking to have an abortion.

CONCLUSIONS

ECtHR judges concluded that the failure to provide for a right to conscientious objection does not constitute, in fact, a violation of the more general right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, if provided for by a state law to protect the right to health. The legal ethical and social ramifications of such a decision are of enormous magnitude.

Removing conscientious objection: The impact of 'No Jab No Pay' and 'No Jab No Play' vaccine policies in Australia

Vaccine refusal and hesitancy pose a significant public health threat to communities. Public health authorities have been developing a range of strategies to improve childhood vaccination coverage. This study examines the effect of removing conscientious objection on immunisation coverage for one, two and five year olds in Australia. Conscientious objection was removed from immunisation requirement exemptions for receipt of family assistance payments (national No Jab No Pay) and enrolment in childcare (state No Jab No Play). The impact of these national and state-level policies is evaluated using quarterly coverage data from the Australian Immunisation Register linked with regional data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics at the statistical area level between 2014 and 2018. Results suggest that there have been overall improvements in coverage associated with No Jab No Pay, and states that implemented additional No Jab No Play and tightened documentation requirement policies tended to show more significant increases. However, policy responses were heterogeneous. The improvement in coverage was largest in areas with greater socioeconomic disadvantage, lower median income, more benefit dependency, and higher pre-policy baseline coverage. Overall, while immunisation coverage has increased post removal of conscientious objection, the policies have disproportionally affected lower income families whereas socioeconomically advantaged areas with lower baseline coverage were less responsive. More effective strategies require investigation of differential policy effects on vaccine hesitancy, refusal and access barriers, and diagnosis of causes for unresponsiveness and under-vaccination in areas with persistently low coverage, to better address areas with persistent non-compliance with accordant interventions.

In Defence of Forgetting Evil: A Reply to Pilkington on Conscientious Objection

In a recent article for this journal, Bryan Pilkington (2019) makes a number of critical observations about one of our arguments for non-traditional medical conscientious objectors' duty to refer. Non-traditional conscientious objectors are those professionals who object to indirectly performing actions-like, say, referring to a physician who will perform an abortion. In our response here, we discuss his central objection and clarify our position on the role of value conflicts in non-traditional conscientious objection.

Reply to: Beyond Money: Conscientious Objection in Medicine as a Conflict of Interests

Giubilini and Savulescu in their recent Journal of Bioethical Inquiry symposium article presented an account of conscientious objection that argues for its recognition as a non-financial conflict of interest. In this short commentary, I highlight some problems with their account. First, I discuss their solicitor analogy. Second, I discuss some problems surrounding their objectivity claim about standards of medical care. Next, I discuss some issues arising from consistently applying their approach. Finally, I highlight that conscientious objection should be viewed not as a conflict of interest but as something that society has an interest in preserving. I conclude by arguing that clinicians who have a conscientious objection can be treated in the same way as those who decide to subspecialize and do not need to give up work in their specialty. While Giubilini and Savulescu present an interesting argument about conscientious objection, theirs is not a compelling view. Indeed, the way we approach conscientious objection has more to teach us about conflicts of interest than the other way around.

A Reply to Pruski

In this response paper, we respond to the criticisms that Michal Pruski raised against our article "Beyond Money: Conscientious Objection in Medicine as a Conflict of Interests." We defend our original position against conscientious objection in healthcare by suggesting that the analogies Pruski uses to criticize our paper miss the relevant point and that some of the analogies he uses and the implications he draws are misplaced.

"We don't want problems": reasons for denial of legal abortion based on conscientious objection in Mexico and Bolivia

Background

The misuse of conscientious objection (CO) is a significant barrier to legal abortion access in many countries, especially in Latin America. We examine the reasons for denial of legal abortion services in Mexico and Bolivia and identify ways to mitigate the misuse of CO.

Methods

We conducted 34 in-depth interviews and 12 focus group discussions in two states in Mexico and four departments in Bolivia. Results were coded and categorized using a thematic analysis approach.

Results

Denial of abortion services based on CO is widespread in health facilities in Mexico and Bolivia and is primarily employed for reasons other than moral, religious, or ethical considerations. The main reasons for denial of services based on CO is lack of knowledge about abortion-related laws and fear of legal problems in abortion service provision. Conversely, the main reason to provide services is to comply with relevant laws. Denying services under the guise of CO negatively impacts pregnant people and health care teams, including fewer safe abortion options and increased workload and stigma, respectively. Most respondents cited training and education on abortion law as the foremost way to mitigate the negative impacts of the misuse of CO.

Conclusions

For many health personnel, knowing, understanding, and following the law is reason enough to provide abortion services. Individuals who object due to lack of knowledge about laws and fear of legal problems represent a key population that can be sensitized and equipped with the necessary information and resources to provide legal abortion services.

Ought Conscientious Refusals to Implement Reverse Triage Decisions be Accommodated?

Although one can argue that they do not represent a radical departure from existing practices, protocols for reverse triage certainly step beyond what is ordinarily done in medicine and healthcare. Nevertheless, there seems to be some degree of moral concern regarding the ethical legitimacy of practicing reverse triage in the context of a pandemic. Such concern can be taken as a reflection of the moral antipathy some exhibit towards current practices of withdrawing treatment-that is, when withdrawal of treatment is arguably in the best interests of patients-and a rejection of the purported normative insignificance of withholding and withdrawing. Given that the relevance of the psychological attitudes of some healthcare professionals to the moral assessment of withdrawing and withholding treatment continues to be debated, it would seem that some thought should be given to the introduction and implementation of reverse triage decisions in response to a pandemic. This brief paper will consider if provision should be made for healthcare professionals to conscientiously refuse to participate in reverse triage.

Practical and ethical complexities of MAiD: Examples from Quebec

Background: Legally practiced assisted dying is an ethically complex area in need of empirical and conceptual work. International research suggests that providing assisted dying may be experienced as rewarding and meaningful but also emotionally and psychologically taxing, associated with feelings of loss and loneliness. Yet little research has been published to date, which attends to the long-term effects of providing assisted dying. In this article, I contribute to filling this gap in the literature using the Canadian province Quebec as an illustrative case. Medical aid in dying (MAiD) in the form of physician provided euthanasia has been a lawful end of life healthcare option in Quebec since December 2015 and significant research is currently emerging from this jurisdiction.

Methods: In this article, I draw on nine in-depth interviews with Quebec physicians, all of whom engaged with end of life care in different ways.

Results: Four of the interviewed physicians provided medical aid in dying (MAiD) and five did not. The major themes of MAiD in relation to aggressive treatment, conscientious objection and uneven distribution of work emerge, and it appeared clearly that MAiD was experienced and thought of as qualitatively different to other end of life procedures.

Conclusions: Our findings expose a complexity and contentiousness within the practice, which remains under researched and underreported and indicate avenues where more research is needed.

Quotas: Enabling Conscientious Objection to Coexist with Abortion Access

The debate regarding the role of conscientious objection in healthcare has been protracted, with increasing demands for curbs on conscientious objection. There is a growing body of evidence that indicates that in some cases, high rates of conscientious objection can affect access to legal medical services such as abortion—a major concern of critics of conscientious objection. Moreover, few solutions have been put forward that aim to satisfy both this concern and that of defenders of conscientious objection—being expected to participate in the provision of services that compromise their moral integrity. Here we attempt to bring some resolution to the debate by proposing a pragmatic, long-term solution offering what we believe to be an acceptable compromise—a quota system for medical trainees in specialties where a conscientious objection can be exercised, and is known to cause conflict. We envisage two main objectives of the quota system we propose. First, as a means to introduce conscientious objection into countries where this is not presently permitted. Second, to minimise or eliminate the effects of high rates of conscientious objection in countries such as Italy, where access to legal abortion provision can be negatively affected.

An ethical issue: nurses' conscientious objection regarding induced abortion in South Korea

Background

The Constitutional Court of South Korea declared that an abortion ban was unconstitutional on April 11, 2019. The National Health Care System will provide abortion care across the country as a formal medical service. Conscientious objection is an issue raised during the construction of legal reforms.

Methods

One hundred sixty-seven perioperative nurses responded to the survey questionnaire. Nurses’ perception about conscientious objection, support of legislation regarding conscientious objection, and intention to object were measured. Logistic regression was used to explore the factors associated with support of the legislation and the intention to conscientiously object.

Results

Only 28.8% of the responding nurses were aware of health care professionals’ conscientious objection. The majority (68.7%) felt that patients’ rights should be prioritized over health care professionals’ conscientious objection. On the other hand, 45.8% supported the legislation on conscientious objection to abortion, and 42.5% indicated a willingness to refuse to participate in an abortion case if conscientious objection was permitted. Religion, awareness of conscientious objection, and prioritizing of nurses’ right to conscientious objection were significantly associated with supporting the legislation. Moreover, religion and prioritizing nurses' rights were significantly associated with the intention to conscientiously object.

Conclusions

This study provides information necessary for further discussion of nurses’ conscientious objection. Nursing leaders, researchers, and educators should appeal to nurses and involve them in making policies that balance a women's right to non-discrimination and to receiving appropriate care with nurses' rights to maintain their moral integrity without compromising their professional obligation.

The Problem of "Core Moral Beliefs" as the Ground of Conscientious Objection

Mark Wicclair's defense of conscientious objection is grounded in an effort to respect the core moral beliefs of health care providers. While such a theoretical schema has merit, this paper argues that core moral beliefs should not serve as the basis of conscientious objection in health care because we, as a community, lack reliable access to a person's core moral beliefs and because individuals are prone to be confused about the scope and extent of their core moral beliefs. Furthermore, a person's confusion over their core moral beliefs is likely to be exacerbated when they lack time to investigate those beliefs and are under heightened external pressure to do so-both conditions frequently encountered by health care providers. Finally, the paper considers whether grounding conscientious objection in core moral beliefs might have the unintended consequence of further entrenching the practical problems that the move is aiming to solve.

Accommodating conscientious objection in the midwifery workforce: a ratio-data analysis of midwives, birth and late abortions in 18 European countries in 2016

BACKGROUND

In recent years, the role of a midwife has expanded to include the provision of abortion-related care. The laws on abortion in many European countries allow for those who hold a conscientious objection to participating to refrain from such participation. However, some writers have expressed concerns that this may have a detrimental effect on the workforce and limit women's access to the service.

METHOD

The aim of this study was to provide a picture of the potential exposure midwives in Europe have to late abortions, an important factor in the integration of accommodation of conscientious objection to abortion by midwives into workload planning. We collected data from Ministries of Health or government statistical departments in 32 European countries on numbers of births, abortions, late abortions and midwives in 2016. We conducted a ratio-data analysis in those countries that met the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

Eighteen of the 32 countries provided full data; thus, our calculations are based on a total of 4 036 633 live births, 49 834 late abortions and a total of 132 071 midwives. The calculated ratios of live births to midwife, abortions to midwife and late abortions to midwife illustrate the wide variations between countries in relation to ratios of midwives to live births (15.22-53.99) and late abortions (0.17-1.47) CONCLUSIONS: This study provides the first comprehensive insight to ratios relating to birth and abortion, especially late abortion services, with regard to the midwifery workforce. It is essential to improve the reporting of abortion data and access to it within Europe to support evidence-informed decisions on optimising the contribution of the midwifery workforce especially within highly contentious fields such as abortion services. The study's findings suggest that there should be neither be any difficulty for those who are responsible for workload allocation nor compromises to a women's right to abortion services.

Ethical arguments against coercing provider participation in MAiD (medical assistance in dying) in Ontario, Canada

It has historically been a crime in Canada to provide assistance to someone in ending their own life, however, this paradigm was inverted in 2015 when the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) ruled that restrictions on this practice, within certain defined parameters, violated the right to life, liberty, and security of the person. Subsequently, recent legal and policy decisions have highlighted the issue of how to balance the rights of individuals to access MAiD with the rights of care providers to exercise conscience-based objections to participation in this process. We argue that there is significant harm and ethical hazard in disregarding individual and institutional rights to conscientious objection and since measures less coercive than the threat of regulatory or economic sanctions do exist, there should be no justification for such threats in Canada’s health care systems.

Beyond Money: Conscientious Objection in Medicine as a Conflict of Interests

Conflict of interests (COIs) in medicine are typically taken to be financial in nature: it is often assumed that a COI occurs when a healthcare practitioner's financial interest conflicts with patients' interests, public health interests, or professional obligations more generally. Even when non-financial COIs are acknowledged, ethical concerns are almost exclusively reserved for financial COIs. However, the notion of "interests" cannot be reduced to its financial component. Individuals in general, and medical professionals in particular, have different types of interests, many of which are non-financial in nature but can still conflict with professional obligations. The debate about healthcare delivery has largely overlooked this broader notion of interests. Here, we will focus on health practitioners' moral or religious values as particular types of personal interests involved in healthcare delivery that can generate COIs and on conscientious objection in healthcare as the expression of a particular type of COI. We argue that, in the healthcare context, the COIs generated by interests of conscience can be as ethically problematic, and therefore should be treated in the same way, as financial COIs.

The inequity of conscientious objection: Refusal of emergency contraception

In the medical field, conscientious objection is claimed by providers and pharmacists in an attempt to forgo administering select forms of sexual and reproductive healthcare services because they state it goes against their moral integrity. Such claim of conscientious objection may include refusing to administer emergency contraception to an individual with a medical need that is time-sensitive. Conscientious objection is first defined, and then a historical context is provided on the medical field's involvement with the issue. An explanation of emergency contraception's physiological effects is provided along with historical context of the use on emergency contraception in terms of United States Law. A comparison is given between the United States and other developed countries in regard to conscientious objection. Once an understanding of conscientious objection and emergency contraception is presented, arguments supporting and contradicting the claim are described. Opinions supporting conscientious objection include the support of moral integrity, religious diversity, and less regulation on government involvement in state law will be offered. Finally, arguments against the effects of conscientious objection with emergency contraception are explained in terms of financial implications and other repercussions for people in lower socioeconomic status groups, especially people of color. Although every clinician has the right and responsibility to treat according to their sense of responsibility or conscience, the ethical consequences of living by one's conscience are limiting and negatively impact underprivileged groups of people. It is the aim of this article to advocate against the use of provider's and pharmacist's right to claim conscientious objection due to the inequitable impact the practice has on people of color and individuals with lower incomes.

Conscientious Objection and Clinical Judgement: The Right to Refuse to Harm

This paper argues that healthcare aims at the good of health, that this pursuit of the good necessitates conscience, and that conscience is required in every practical judgement, including clinical judgment. Conscientious objection in healthcare is usually restricted to a handful of controversial ends (e.g. abortion, euthanasia, contraception), yet the necessity of conscience in all clinical judgements implies the possibility of conscientious objection to means. The distinction between conscientious objection to means and ends is explored and its implications considered. Based on this, it is suggested that conscientious objection, whether to means or ends, occurs when a proposed course of action comes into irreconcilable conflict with the moral principle 'do no harm'. It is, therefore, concluded that conscientious objection in healthcare can be conceived as a requirement of the moral imperative to do no harm, the right to refuse to harm in regard to health.

Emergency Contraception: are the rights to conscience and to reproductive freedom irreconcilable?

Emergency Contraception (EC) has been gaining attention for its controversial nature, from the ethical, moral and religious perspectives. Objecting health professionals feel that the implementation of certain procedures or the prescription of some drugs would engender a conflict of conscience. That is also true in the context of reproductive medicine and not only limited to EC, but including abortion and some medically-assisted procreation procedures; all such procedures have created a rift between sexuality and procreation that has substantial ethical complexities. Provided that respect for conscience is essential, and codified in many national and international statutes, any refusal to provide services or medication should be limited if it might negatively affect a patient's health, is based on scientific misinformation, or could bring about inequalities of any kind. First and foremost, any imposition of religious or moral beliefs on patients should not be countenanced. In fact, any form of conscientious objection that could harm patient well-being should be allowed only if the fundamental duty towards patients can be effectively discharged. The right to thorough and unbiased information is crucial so as to enable patients to make well-informed decisions. Moreover, as the WHO has remarked, access to safe and legal reproductive services should be fostered particularly in at-risk, resource-poor areas.

Conscientious Objection: A Talmudic Paradigm Shift

Conscientious objection remains a very heated topic with strong opinions arguing for and against its utilization in contemporary health care. This paper summarizes and analyzes various arguments in the bioethical literature, favoring and opposing conscientious objection, as well as some of the proposed solutions and compromises. I then present a paradigm shifting compromise approach that arises out of very recent Jewish bioethical thought that refocuses the discussion and can minimize the frequency with which conscientious objection is required.

Conscientious Objection in Medicine: Making it Public

The literature on conscientious objection in medicine presents two key problems that remain unresolved: (a) Which conscientious objections in medicine are justified, if it is not feasible for individual medical practitioners to conclusively demonstrate the genuineness or reasonableness of their objections ("the justification problem")? (b) How does one respect both medical practitioners' claims of conscience and patients' interests, without leaving practitioners complicit in perceived or actual wrongdoing ("the complicity problem")? My aim in this paper is to offer a new framework for conscientious objections in medicine, which, by bringing medical professionals' conscientious objection into the public realm, solves the justification and complicity problems. In particular, I will argue that: (a) an "Uber Conscientious Objection in Medicine Committee" ("UCOM Committee")-which includes representatives from the medical community and from other professions, as well as from various religions and from the patient population-should assess various well-known conscientious objections in medicine in terms of public reason and decide which conscientious objections should be permitted, without hearing out individual conscientious objectors; (b) medical practitioners should advertise their (UCOM Committee preapproved) conscientious objections, ahead of time, in an online database that would be easily accessible to the public, without being required, in most cases, to refer patients to non-objecting practitioners.

Conscience Dissenters and Disagreement: Professions are Only as Good as Their Practitioners

In this paper, I consider the role of conscience in medical practice. If the conscientious practice of individual practitioners cannot be defended or is incoherent or unreasonable on its own merits, then there is little reason to support conscience protection and to argue about its place in the current medical landscape. If this is the case, conscience protection should be abandoned. To the contrary, I argue that conscience protection should not be abandoned. My argument takes the form of an analysis of an essential feature of the conscience dissenter's argument, the role of disagreement within "the medical profession." Conscience dissenters make certain assumptions within their arguments about the profession, disagreements within the professions, and how such disagreement should be adjudicated. If it is the case that these assumptions are accurate reflections of the current medical landscape, then the advocate of conscience protection has one less leg to stand on. I aim to show that this is not the case and that the assumptions of the conscience dissenter are not only mistaken but are mistakes of significant magnitude, so significant as to raise serious questions about the merit of their position. If the argument in this paper is sound, then, at the very least, the conversation over conscience protection in medicine, in particular, and health care, in general, must continue.

The impact of gynecologists' conscientious objection on abortion access

Although abortion in Italy is free of charge and legal in a broad set of circumstances, 71% of gynecologists are registered as conscientious objectors, i.e. they are exempted from performing abortions for reasons of religious or moral beliefs. To assess whether this practice limits abortion access, we analyze aggregate regional data on abortion and a dataset of over one million clinical records of single interventions performed between 2002 and 2016. Results, from both cross-regional panel data and microdata analysis, suggest that conscientious objection hampers abortion access at the local level, being a significant driver of a woman's decision of having an abortion out of the region of residence and leading to longer waiting times to have one. Conscientious objection appears to have a stronger impact on women living in lower-income regions or experiencing other forms of economic disadvantage.

Refusals to perform ritual circumcision: a qualitative study of doctors' professional and ethical reasoning

Background

Ritual circumcision of infant boys is controversial in Norway, as in many other countries. The procedure became a part of Norwegian public health services in 2015. A new law opened for conscientious objection to the procedure. We have studied physicians’ refusals to perform ritual circumcision as an issue of professional ethics.

Method

Qualitative interview study with 10 urologists who refused to perform ritual circumcision from six Norwegian public hospitals. Interviews were recorded and transcribed, then analysed with systematic text condensation, a qualitative analysis framework.

Results

The physicians are unanimous in grounding their opposition to the procedure in professional standards and norms, based on fundamental tenets of professional ethics. While there is homogeneity in the group when it comes to this reasoning, there are significant variations as to how deeply the matter touches the urologists on a personal level. About half of them connect their stance to their personal integrity, and state that performing the procedure would go against their conscience and lead to pangs of conscience.

Conclusions

It is argued that professional moral norms sometimes might become more or less ‘integrated’ in the professional’s core moral values and moral identity. If this is the case, then the distinction between conscience-based and professional refusals to certain healthcare services cannot be drawn as sharply as it has been.

Experience obtaining legal abortion in Uruguay: knowledge, attitudes, and stigma among abortion clients

BACKGROUND

The abortion law in Uruguay changed in 2012 to allow first trimester abortion on request. Implementation of the law in Uruguay has been lauded, but barriers to care, including abortion stigma, remain. This study aimed to assess women's experiences seeking abortion services and related attitudes and knowledge following implementation of the law in Uruguay.

METHODS

We interviewed 207 eligible women seeking abortion services at a high-volume public hospital in Montevideo in 2014. We generated univariate frequencies to describe women's experiences in care. We conducted regression analysis to examine variations in experiences of stigma by women's age and number of abortions.

RESULTS

Most of the women felt that abortion was a right, were satisfied with the services they received, and agreed with the abortion law. However, 70% found the five-day waiting period unnecessary. Women experienced greater self-judgement than worries about being judged by others. Younger women in the sample (ages 18-21) reported being more worried about judgment than women 22 years or older (1.02 vs. 0.71 on the ILAS sub-scale). One quarter of participants reported feeling judged while obtaining services. Women with more than one abortion had nearly three times the odds of reporting feeling judged.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings highlight the need to address abortion stigma even after the law is changed. Some considerations from Uruguay that may be relevant to other jurisdictions reforming abortion laws include: the need for strategies to reduce judgmental behavior from staff and clinicians towards women seeking abortions, including training in counseling skills and empathic communication; addressing stigmatizing attitudes about abortion through community outreach or communications campaigns; mitigating the potential stigma that may be perpetuated through policies to prevent "repeat" abortions; ensuring that younger women and those with more than one abortion feel welcome and are not mistreated during care; and assessing the necessity of a waiting period. The rapid implementation of legal, voluntary abortion services in Uruguay can serve in many ways as an exemplar, and these findings may inform the process of abortion law reform in other countries.

Conscience, tolerance, and pluralism in health care

Increasingly, physicians are being asked to provide technical services that many (in some cases, most) believe are morally wrong or inconsistent with their beliefs about the meaning and purposes of medicine. This controversy has sparked persistent debate over whether practitioners should be permitted to decline participation in a variety of legal practices, most notably physician-assisted suicide and abortion. These debates have become heavily politicized, and some of the key words and phrases are being used without a clear understanding of their meaning. In this essay, I endeavor, firstly, to clarify the meaning of some of these terms: conscience, conscientious action, professional judgment, conscientious objection, conscience clauses, civil disobedience, and tolerance. I argue that use of the term conscientious objection to describe these refusals by health care professionals is mistaken and confusing. Secondly, relying on a proper understanding of the moral and technical character of medical judgment, the optimal deference that the state and markets ought to have toward professions, and general principles of Lockean tolerance for a diversity of practices and persons in a flourishing, pluralistic, democratic society, I offer a defense of tolerance with respect to the deeply held convictions of physicians and other health care professionals who hold minority views on contested but legal medical practices.