Premium
Doctors Have no Right to Refuse Medical Assistance in Dying, Abortion or Contraception
Author(s) -
Savulescu Julian,
Schuklenk Udo
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
bioethics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.494
H-Index - 55
eISSN - 1467-8519
pISSN - 0269-9702
DOI - 10.1111/bioe.12288
Subject(s) - conscientious objector , abortion , law , relation (database) , medicine , subject (documents) , therapeutic abortion , political science , pregnancy , spanish civil war , database , biology , library science , computer science , genetics
Abstract In an article in this journal, Christopher Cowley argues that we have ‘misunderstood the special nature of medicine, and have misunderstood the motivations of the conscientious objectors’.[Note 1. C. Cowley. A defence of conscientious objection in medicine: ...] We have not. It is Cowley who has misunderstood the role of personal values in the profession of medicine. We argue that there should be better protections for patients from doctors' personal values and there should be more severe restrictions on the right to conscientious objection, particularly in relation to assisted dying. We argue that eligible patients could be guaranteed access to medical services that are subject to conscientious objections by: (1) removing a right to conscientious objection; (2) selecting candidates into relevant medical specialities or general practice who do not have objections; (3) demonopolizing the provision of these services away from the medical profession.