Is conscientious objection (CO) necessarily incompatible with the role and duties of a healthcare professional? An influential minority of writers on the subject think that it is. Here, we outline the positive case for accommodating CO and examine one particular type of incompatibility claim, namely that CO is fundamentally incompatible with proper healthcare professionalism because the attitude of the conscientious objector exists in opposition to the disposition (attitudes and underlying character) that we should expect from a 'good' healthcare professional. We ask first whether this claim is true : what is the disposition of a 'good' healthcare professional, and how does CO align with or contradict it? Then, we consider compatibility, acknowledging the need to identify appropriate limits on the exercise of CO and considering what those limits might be. We conclude that CO is fundamentally incompatible - either in principle in practice - with good healthcare professionalism.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20502877.2019.1651935 | DOI Listing |
PLOS Glob Public Health
February 2025
Guttmacher Institute, New York, New York, United States of America.
Argentina's 2021 abortion law grants the right to abortion on-request up to 14 weeks' gestation, as well as continuing to allow abortion after 14 weeks on specific grounds. The early years after law reform provide a unique opportunity to assess progress and identify barriers, to both inform program improvements and guide other countries undergoing reform. This study assesses the first two years of law implementation.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!