Friday, July 25, 2014

Conscientious objection and pro-choice doctors

When I last wrote about Joyce Arthur and her belief that doctors shouldn't be allowed to practice conscientious objection, I was (delightfully) surprised to learn that those of the "pro-choice" persuasion don't all necessarily agree with her. Like the British Pregnancy Advisory Service (bpas) and Global Doctors for Choice.

In this shorter pieceArthur laments that International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics also does not agree with her:
"Unfortunately, a global consensus seems to have emerged among (pro-choice) medical professionals that clinicians do indeed have a right to deny reproductive health care that they personally disagree with. A recent example of this consensus was a special supplement called “Conscientious Objection to the Provision of Reproductive Healthcare,” published by the International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics (IJGO) in December. The supplement contains five pieces on the topic: an editorial, three short articles, and a long white paper by three physicians from Global Doctors for Choice." 
Now the white paper also puts forward the notion that although they agree with conscientious objection, they still want doctors to refer. Which of course is a non-starter. If you think that something is immoral, you don't go ahead and refer to someone else. That would mean you're still complicit in the immoral act.

The document is 34 pages and includes footnotes.

No comments:

Post a Comment