Morning after pill Archives - Page 6 of 10 - Protection of Conscience Project Library

Conscience in America: the slippery slope of mixing morality with medicine

Georgia Chudoba

Extract

Extract
Conscience clauses in this country are becoming dangerously broad and over-inclusive. What was once a protection for physicians who objected to performing abortions is now a tool for religious activists to obstruct a patient’s right to contraceptives, sterilization, and any other medical procedure that they feel is “morally” wrong. The Legislature must place limits on these clauses to protect patients’ rights. At the onset of new medical research on stem cells and infertility treatments, it is crucial that Congress enact legislation that will protect patients’ rights to these treatments. There needs to be a balance between the doctor’s right of conscience and the patient’s right to treatment.

Chudoba G. Conscience in America: the slippery slope of mixing morality with medicine. Southwestern University Law Review. 2007;36(1):85-106.

Conscientious Objection the Morning After (Conscientious Objection and Emergency Contraception)

Carson Strong

Extract
In summary, Card supports his view with weak arguments, makes an erroneous assumption about the state of scientific inquiry, and misrepresents the argument of his opponents. When these various errors are brought to light, it becomes clear that Card has not successfully defended his extreme view. . . . Everyone accepts that conscientious refusal conflicts with the patient’s interests. The question is whether this particular type of failure to meet the patient’s interests can ever be ethically justifiable. Simply pointing out that there is a conflict does not constitute an argument. If a limited right to conscientious refusal is consistent with being a professional, then professional organizations that acknowledge such a right are not acting contrary to the purposes and roles of such organizations. What is needed to support de Melo-Martin’s position is an argument that conscientious refusals never, or at least hardly ever, override a patient’s interests, and de Melo-Martin does not provide this.

Strong C. Conscientious Objection the Morning After (Conscientious Objection and Emergency Contraception). Am J Bioethcs. 2007;7(6):32-34.

Caution: Conscience is the Limb on Which Medical Ethics Sits (Conscientious Objection and Emergency Contraception)

Farr A Curlin

Extract
Card (2007) does not merely claim that practitioners are obligated to provide EC; he argues that they are obligated to do so even if they have a conscientious objection. This last clause may seem harmless on the surface, but a closer look reveals that it effectively saws off the limb on which the first clause and all medical ethics sit. . . . A genuine conscientious objection, even if misinformed, is an expression of a commitment to acting morally, and . . . judgments of conscience need not be informed by explicitly religious ideas. Moreover, all ethical arguments are appeals to conscience. As such, acting conscientiously is the most fundamental of all moral obligations.

Curlin FA. Caution: Conscience is the Limb on Which Medical Ethics Sits (Conscientious Objection and Emergency Contraception). Am J Bioeth. 2007;7(6):30-31.

Pharmacists and the Social Contract (Conscientious Objection and Emergency Contraception)

Kenneth A Richman

Extract
. . .pharmacists in the news who claim that emergency contraception causes abortion are acting impermissibly by basing their conscientious objection on false claims. . . My main point here, however, is drawn from a familiar concept of political philosophy — the idea of a social contract. . . Pharmacists benefit from a monopoly on the right to dispense prescription medications. This monopoly, like those offered to public utilities, comes with responsibilities that go beyond the usual duties of professionalism. Pharmacists have a duty to conform to the system which has invested in them and in which they have a vested interest. . .Card (2007) argues that the prima facie right to conscientious objection is defeated by the facts of this particular case. Applying the argument of the Crito to the role of pharmacists in the United States leads us to conclude that this prima facie right is defeated for the pharmacist in the professional role in all cases. What remains are the right to work for change and the right to opt out of the professional role entirely.

Richman KA. Pharmacists and the Social Contract. Am J Bioethics 2007 Jun 01, 7:6,15-16,DOI: 10.1080/15265160701347247

Gatekeeping and Personal Values: Misuses of Professional Roles (Conscientious Objection and Emergency Contraception)

D Micah Hester, Toby Schonfeld, Jean Amoura

Extract
. . .pharmacists and physicians who deny EC to women misuse their role as gatekeepers. This is because EC is safer than many over-the-counter (OTC) medications; therefore, its distribution does not require providers to exercise a particular skill or apply special knowledge. As a result,healthcare providers may appropriately act as advisors to women seeking EC, but may not use their role as gatekeepers as away of imposing their values on the women in their care. . . physicians and pharmacists who bar women from access to EC do so without professional cause. They misuse their role as gatekeeper, imposing personal values where professional ones should prevail.

Hester DM, Schonfeld T, Amoura J. Gatekeeping and Personal Values: Misuses of Professional Roles (Conscientious Objection and Emergency Contraception). Am J Med Ethics. 2007 Jun;7(6):27-8. doi: 10.1080/15265160701347361

Conscientious Objection? Yes, but make sure it’s genuine. (Conscientious Objection and Emergency Contraception)

Christopher Meyers, Robert D Woods

Extract
In our earlier essay (Meyers and Woods 1996, 118–119), and in alignment with Card’s (2007) analogy, we recommended a system similar to that used for exemption from military service, one that incorporates a review board for evaluating claims of genuine conscientious objection. Because different groups have different means for communicating that a belief is profoundly held, the review board should be structured to represent a diversity of racial, ethnic and religious beliefs and academic training. Furthermore, to reduce the potential power asymmetry between the review board and petitioners, it should also include a range of disciplines—medicine, nursing, mental health, social services, chaplaincy—and representatives from the community.

Meyers C, Woods RD. Conscientious Objection? Yes, but make sure it’s genuine. (Conscientious Objection and Emergency Contraception). Am J Bioeth. 2007;7(6):. Available from:

Should Professional Associations Sanction Conscientious Refusals? (Conscientious Objection and Emergency Contraception)

Inmaculada de Melo-Martin

Extract
Notice that I am not defending the argument that pharmacists have no right to exercise conscientious refusals. My point is that a professional organization’s policy allowing such refusals cannot be squared with a code of ethics that calls for pharmacists to put concern for the well-being of patients at the center of their professional practice. In fact, such a policy establishes the appropriateness of ignoring the code’s principles anytime a pharmacist has a problem of conscience.

de Melo-Martin I. Should Professional Associations Sanction Conscientious Refusals? (Conscientious Objection and Emergency Contraception). Am J Bioeth. 2007;7(6):23-24.

Conscientious Objection: Does the Zero-Probability Argument Work? (Conscientious Objection and Emergency Contraception)

Greg Loeben, Michelle A Chui

Extract
It seems clear from these observations that Card (2007) uses the zero probability argument as a bit of a straw man. The conscientious objector does not rely on such a simplistic claim. In fact, conscientious objection can and should be evaluated in light of a variety of components, rather than the mere possibility that one’s actions will contribute to an unethical result. Specifically, conscientious objection appears to be made more plausible by a variety of factors, including the likelihood, intentionality, causal directness, degree of consensus, and not least, the severity of the unethical action.

Loeben G, Chui MA. Conscientious Objection: Does the Zero-Probability Argument Work? (Conscientious Objection and Emergency Contraception). Am J Bioeth. 2007 Jun;7(6):28-30.

The Necessity of Conscience and the Unspoken Ends of Medicine (Conscientious Objection and Emergency Contraception)

John J Hardt

Extract
The difficulties lie in those cases in which there is disagreement about the ends of medicine and the obligations they impose on its practitioners. It may very well be the case that in focusing our attention on particular acts of conscientious objection, we will fail to attend to the underlying and more pressing need to engage once again in a conversation on the nature of medicine and its proper ends. . . . It is here, I would suggest, that one will find the root cause of much of our current, heated debate about conscience and, perhaps, some possible resolution.

Hardt JJ. The Necessity of Conscience and the Unspoken Ends of Medicine (Conscientious Objection and Emergency Contraception). Am J Bioeth. 2007;7(6):18-19.

When to Grant Conscientious Objector Status (Conscientious Objection and Emergency Contraception)

Ronald A Lindsay

Extract
Provided the physician notifies the patient as soon as possible of any limitations on services and promptly assists the patient with referrals to other physicians, physicians should be allowed to refuse to provide some services. However, once the patient and physician have decided on a course of action, they should be able to rely on the cooperation of other healthcare workers. The last thing we need is to complicate our healthcare system even further by allowing pharmacists, nurses, and others to obstruct a person’s healthcare decisions based on their sectarian beliefs.

Lindsay RA. When to Grant Conscientious Objector Status (Conscientious Objection and Emergency Contraception). Am J Bioethcs. 2007 Jun 01 ;7(6):25-26. Available from: