The Ethical Justification for Conscience Clauses in Nurse‐Midwifery Practice: Context, Power, and a Changing Landscape

In the last century, conscientious objection has moved from objection to conscripted military service to include health care providers who have moral concerns about participation in specific aspects of health care. Although guidance for the use of conscientious objection has developed in both nursing and midwifery, changes in the political landscape may be creating a source of conflict between providers and the use of conscientious objection. Particularly in aspects of sexual and reproductive care like abortion, contraception, and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or queer health care, the ethical requirement for prompt referral is becoming increasingly difficult to meet in many contexts. Changes to federal regulations protecting conscience clauses have tilted strongly in favor of the rights of providers in recent years; this challenges the delicate balance of patient and provider rights that has developed over the years. These may now represent an unavoidable conflict between different aspects of the ethical obligations of providers, in particular the obligation to seek justice, and bring into question whether the current status of conscientious objection is sustainable. In this article, we examine these conflicts in the context of the current political climate.