This article analyzes the problem of complicity in wrongdoing in the case of healthcare practitioners (and in particular Roman Catholic ones) who refuse to perform abortions, but who are nonetheless required to facilitate abortions by informing their patients about this option and by referring them to a willing colleague. Although this solution is widely supported in the literature and is also widely represented in much legislation, the argument here is that it fails to both (1) safeguard the well-being of the patients, and (2) protect the moral integrity of healthcare practitioners. Finally, the article proposes a new solution to this problem that is based on a desirable ratio of conscientious objectors to non-conscientious objectors in a hospital or in a given geographic area.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0963180116000682 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
Concept Analysis of Moral Distress in Pain Management.
Pain Manag Nurs
November 2024
Calvin University, Grand Rapids, MI. Electronic address:
Objective: Managing pain continues to be a difficult issue worldwide. Pain management has ethical connotations, with the potential to result in moral distress in nurses. The aim of this concept analysis is to analyze moral distress in pain management.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFRebalancing commercial and public interests in prioritizing biomedical, social and environmental aspects of health through defining and managing conflicts of interest.
Front Med (Lausanne)
September 2023
Division of Medical Ethics, Grossman School of Medicine, New York University, New York, NY, United States.
Biomedical research is intended to benefit human beings and their health. Toward that end, scientific norms involve examining and criticizing the work of others and prioritizing questions that should be studied. Yet, in areas of health research where industry is active, it has often utilized well-honed strategies aimed at evading scientific standards and at dominating the research agenda, largely through its financial support and lack of transparency of its research practices.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFComplicity at a distance: commemorating problematic involvement in perpetration in contemporary Central and Eastern European literatures.
Open Res Eur
May 2022
Department of Comparative Literature, Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, Munich, Bavaria, 80799, Germany.
: In the twenty-first century, literatures from Central and Eastern Europe are marked by a boom of documentary fiction portraying complicity Nazi perpetration, Soviet terror, or other instances of 20th century mass violence and totalitarianism. Since understanding the past serves requirements of the present, the boom prompts the question: Why the interest in past complicities now? My hypothesis is that the texts address convergences between involvements in past acts of mass violence and current forms of participation in wrongdoings in neoliberalism. While these issues differ profoundly, they are related: structurally, both present the challenge of forming a nuanced notion of participation.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFComplicity in Harm Reduction.
Health Care Anal
December 2020
2100 Adamany Undergraduate Library, Wayne State University, 5155 Gullen Mall, Detroit, MI, 48202, USA.
At first glance, it seems difficult to object to any program that merits the label "harm reduction." If harm is bad, as everyone recognizes, then surely reducing it is good. What's the problem? The problem, we submit, is twofold.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFConscientious Objection in Medicine: Making it Public.
HEC Forum
September 2021
Department of Philosophy, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 200 Gregory Hall, 810 South Wright Street, Urbana, IL, 61801, USA.
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.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFWant AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!