Abstract Debate about physician-assisted suicide has typically focused on the values of autonomy and patient well-being. This is understandable, even reasonable, given the importance of these values in bioethics. However, these are not the only moral values there are. The purpose of this paper is to examine physician-assisted suicide on the basis of the values of equality and justice. In particular, I will evaluate two arguments that invoke equality, one in favour of physician-assisted suicide, one against it, and I will eventually argue that a convincing equality-based argument in support of physician-assisted suicide is available. I will conclude by showing how an equality-based perspective transforms some secondary features of debate about this issue.
Abstract This paper addresses laws and practices urged by conservative religious organizations that invoke conscientious objection in order to deny patients access to lawful procedures. Many are reproductive health services, such as contraception, sterilization and abortion, on which women’s health depends. Religious institutions that historically served a mission to provide healthcare are now perverting this commitment in order to deny care. Physicians who followed their calling honourably in a spirit of self-sacrifice are being urged to sacrifice patients’ interests to promote their own, compromising their professional ethics by conflict of interest. The shield tolerant societies allowed to protect religious conscience is abused by religiously-influenced agencies that beat it into a sword to compel patients, particularly women, to comply with religious values they do not share. This is unethical unless accompanied by objectors’ duty of referral to non-objecting practitioners, and governmental responsibility to ensure supply of and patients’ access to such practitioners.
Abstract Pro-life Christian ethicists and medical practitioners have been united in their opposition to abortion, but have sometimes been divided in their ethical approach to hormonal contraception. Even though many Christians believe that birth control may be a moral option, some claim that the “Pill” acts, at least some of the time, as an abortifacient. If true, Christians who hold that human personhood begins at conception would be morally opposed to the use of combined oral contraceptives. This article examines the scientific evidence for an abortifacient effect of such contraceptive agents, and concludes that such an effect is yet unproven. Some of the ethical arguments are also examined, and the author suggests that further research on early pregnancy factor (EPF) may help to resolve this controversial issue.
Extract It is apparent that Catholic health care is suffused with a religious purpose. Its creation is based upon Church interpretation of a duty to Jesus, and its facilities are required to adhere to formal prescriptions of appropriate canonical, ethical and moral behavior. As recently as twenty years ago, questions regarding a facility’s Catholicity and the implications of this calling would rarely have been asked. In part this was because of the highly visible presence of Sisters or Brothers in the facility, making the religious nature of the institution readily apparent to even the casual observer. Too, few Catholic institutions were part of health care systems, and those systems that existed were of a local or regional nature, likely well- known by the communities served.
Today, many Catholic health care facilities have joined together into larger (often multi-state) health care systems with less visible Sister presence and the development of sophisticated corporate management teams distant from day-to-day operations and local community involvement. Many of these systems enjoy significant market power. As discussed below, the heightened visibility of these organizations has led to very public questioning of institutional adherence to religious teaching (especially in the area of sterilizations and, to a lesser extent, abortion), posing a significant challenge to the Catholic mission. Other significant challenges to the mission have also arisen, as the law, the competitive environment, and even changes within the Church present their own hurdles to Catholic facilities. Section III discusses these issues, setting the stage in Part IV for a discussion of whether a religious mission is sustainable in a pluralistic society.
Singer LE. Does Mission Matter? Houston J Health Law Pol. 2006 Sep;6(2):347-377.
Extract Conclusion Physician participation in assisted suicide or euthanasia can have a profound harmful effect on the involved physicians. Doctors must take responsibility for causing the patient’s death. There is a huge burden on conscience, tangled emotions and a large psychological toll on the participating physicians. Many physicians describe feelings of isolation. Published evidence indicates that some patients and others are pressuring and intimidating doctors to assist in suicides. Some doctors feel they have no choice but to be involved in assisted suicides. Oregon physicians are decreasingly present at the time of the assisted suicide. There is also great potential for physicians to be affected by countertransference issues in dealing with end-of-Iife care, and assisted suicide and euthanasia..
Abstract Conclusion Ultimately, this Article proposes a new model for such “conscientious objections,” one that presumes the general obligation ‘of health care professionals, who hold monopolistic state licenses, to participate in requested medical care that is not contraindicated or illegal, notwithstanding their personal moral objections. This model is based on “the· premise that it “is the patient’s best interest (as determined by -the patient, but mediated by the health care professional’s medical judgment), not the health care professional’s personal interests, that should govern the professional relationship. This should be the standard taught in professional schools and promoted by professional associations. “Conscientious objections” should be permissible based on prevailing medical ethics; however, to the extent that they are based on the personal morals of the· health care professional, they should be actively discouraged.
Abstract This article argues that practitioners have a professional ethical obligation to dispense emergency contraception, even given conscientious objection to this treatment. This recent controversy affects all medical professionals, including physicians as well as pharmacists. This article begins by analyzing the option of referring the patient to another willing provider. Objecting professionals may conscientiously refuse because they consider emergency contraception to be equivalent to abortion or because they believe contraception itself is immoral. This article critically evaluates these reasons and concludes that they do not successfully support conscientious objection in this context. Contrary to the views of other thinkers, it is not possible to easily strike a respectful balance between the interests of objecting providers and patients in this case. As medical professionals, providers have an ethical duty to inform women of this option and provide emergency contraception when this treatment is requested.
Farr A Curlin, Marshall H Chin, Sarah A Sellergen, Chad J Roach, John D Lantos
Medical Care
Abstract Context: Controversy exists regarding whether and how physicians should address religion/spirituality (R/S) with patients.
Objective: This study examines the relationship between physicians’ religious characteristics and their attitudes and self-reported behaviors regarding R/S in the clinical encounter.
Methods: A cross-sectional mailed survey of a stratified random sample of 2000 practicing U.S. physicians from all specialties. Main criterion variables were self-reported practices of R/S inquiry, dialogue regarding R/S issues, and prayer with patients. Main predictor variables were intrinsic religiosity, spirituality, and religious affiliation.
Results: Response rate was 63%. Almost all physicians (91%) say it is appropriate to discuss R/S issues if the patient brings them up, and 73% say that when R/S issues comes up they often or always encourage patients’ own R/S beliefs and practices. Doctors are more divided about when it is appropriate for physicians to inquire regarding R/S (45% believe it is usually or always inappropriate), talk about their own religious beliefs or experiences (14% say never, 43% say only when the patient asks), and pray with patients (17% say never, 53% say only when the patient asks). Physicians who identify themselves as more religious and more spiritual, particularly those who are Protestants, are significantly more likely to endorse and report each of the different ways of addressing R/S in the clinical encounter.
Conclusions: Differences in physicians’ religious and spiritual characteristics are associated with differing attitudes and behaviors regarding R/S in the clinical encounter. Discussions of the appropriateness of addressing R/S matters in the clinical encounter will need to grapple with these deeply rooted differences among physicians..
Ian Bennett, Abigail Calkins Aguirre, Jean Burg, Madelon L Finkel, Elizabeth Wolff, Katherine Bowman, Joan Fleischman
Family Medicine
Abstract Objectives: Early abortion is a common outpatient procedure, but few family medicine residencies provide abortion training. We wished to assess experiences and obstacles among residency programs that have worked to establish early abortion services. Methods: From 2001–2004, 14 faculty participated in a collaborative program to initiate abortion training at seven family medicine residencies. Ten focus groups with all trainees were followed by individual semi-structured interviews with a smaller group (n=9) that explored the progress and obstacles they experienced. Individual interviews were recorded and analyzed to identify major themes and sub-themes related to initiating abortion training. Results: Five of seven sites established abortion training. Five major themes were identified: (1) establishing support, (2) administration, (3) finance, (4) legal matters,and (5) security/demonstrators. Faculty from sites where training was ultimately established rated the sub-themes of billing/reimbursement, obtaining staff support, and state/hospital regulations as most difficult. Gaining support from within the department and institution was most difficult for the two sites that could not establish training. None experienced difficulty with security/demonstrators. Conclusions: Developing the clinical and administrative capacity to provide early abortion services in family medicine residency programs is feasible. Support from leadership within departments and from the wider institution is important for implementation.
Journal Extract The dilemma of conscientious objection by US pharmacists has yet to be resolved. The issue was thrust into the mass-media spotlight when a pharmacist in Texas rejected a rape victim’s prescription for emergency contraception (the morning-after pill). The pharmacist argued that dispensing the drug was a “violation of morals”.
Further cases have since been reported and include such acts as intimidation and confiscation of the prescription by the pharmacist. Pharmacists argue that they are a health-care provider and, like doctors, should have the right to refuse to participate in services they morally object to. Pharmacists argue that they are a health-care provider and, like doctors, should have the right to refuse to participate in services they morally object to. In fact, the policy of the American Pharmacists Association permits pharmacists to object to dispensing drugs but requires them to ensure another pharmacist is available to dispense or transfer the prescription to another pharmacy. Further, the Association argues that this approach is “seamless” and the patient is “not aware that the pharmacist is stepping away from the situation”.
