Conscientious objection, 'proper medical treatment' and professionalism: the limits of accommodation for conscience in healthcare

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Abstract

In recent years there has been a marked increase in academic interest in the phenomenon of conscientious objection (CO) in healthcare. The resulting literature, which is already substantial and continually expanding, reflects a spectrum of opinion on the practice ranging from support through mere toleration to barely disguised (and occasionally open) hostility. Despite some forceful academic opposition, however, most scholars who engage with the issue recognise the appropriateness of accommodating CO at least to some extent. The usual way of explaining why it is necessary and/or desirable to accommodate CO involves citing the need to protect individuals from being obliged to violate their moral integrity in the course of performing their professional roles. The meaning of ‘moral integrity’ is itself the subject of detailed philosophical debate, and is not my focus in this chapter: here, I presuppose that ‘a physician’s interest in moral integrity is a very important interest that has substantial moral weight’ and that the primary reason for accommodating and exercising CO is that we recognise the value of moral integrity and wish to respect and preserve it.
LanguageEnglish
Title of host publicationReligious Beliefs and Conscientious Exemptions in a Liberal State
EditorsJohn Adenitire
Place of PublicationCambridge
Chapter8
Pages135-156
Number of pages22
Publication statusPublished - 13 Jun 2019

Fingerprint

conscience
physician's care
accommodation
integrity
respect
opposition
physician
professionalism
Values

Keywords

  • conscience
  • conscientious objection
  • conscience-based exemptions
  • professionalism
  • medical law
  • medical treatment
  • healthcare law
  • healthcare ethics
  • medical ethics

Cite this

Neal, M. (2019). Conscientious objection, 'proper medical treatment' and professionalism: the limits of accommodation for conscience in healthcare. In J. Adenitire (Ed.), Religious Beliefs and Conscientious Exemptions in a Liberal State (pp. 135-156). Cambridge.
Neal, Mary. / Conscientious objection, 'proper medical treatment' and professionalism : the limits of accommodation for conscience in healthcare. Religious Beliefs and Conscientious Exemptions in a Liberal State. editor / John Adenitire. Cambridge, 2019. pp. 135-156
@inbook{4352562b55e54c3bba3f87ad89747404,
title = "Conscientious objection, 'proper medical treatment' and professionalism: the limits of accommodation for conscience in healthcare",
abstract = "In recent years there has been a marked increase in academic interest in the phenomenon of conscientious objection (CO) in healthcare. The resulting literature, which is already substantial and continually expanding, reflects a spectrum of opinion on the practice ranging from support through mere toleration to barely disguised (and occasionally open) hostility. Despite some forceful academic opposition, however, most scholars who engage with the issue recognise the appropriateness of accommodating CO at least to some extent. The usual way of explaining why it is necessary and/or desirable to accommodate CO involves citing the need to protect individuals from being obliged to violate their moral integrity in the course of performing their professional roles. The meaning of ‘moral integrity’ is itself the subject of detailed philosophical debate, and is not my focus in this chapter: here, I presuppose that ‘a physician’s interest in moral integrity is a very important interest that has substantial moral weight’ and that the primary reason for accommodating and exercising CO is that we recognise the value of moral integrity and wish to respect and preserve it.",
keywords = "conscience, conscientious objection, conscience-based exemptions, professionalism, medical law, medical treatment, healthcare law, healthcare ethics, medical ethics",
author = "Mary Neal",
year = "2019",
month = "6",
day = "13",
language = "English",
isbn = "9781509920938",
pages = "135--156",
editor = "John Adenitire",
booktitle = "Religious Beliefs and Conscientious Exemptions in a Liberal State",

}

Neal, M 2019, Conscientious objection, 'proper medical treatment' and professionalism: the limits of accommodation for conscience in healthcare. in J Adenitire (ed.), Religious Beliefs and Conscientious Exemptions in a Liberal State. Cambridge, pp. 135-156.

Conscientious objection, 'proper medical treatment' and professionalism : the limits of accommodation for conscience in healthcare. / Neal, Mary.

Religious Beliefs and Conscientious Exemptions in a Liberal State. ed. / John Adenitire. Cambridge, 2019. p. 135-156.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

TY - CHAP

T1 - Conscientious objection, 'proper medical treatment' and professionalism

T2 - the limits of accommodation for conscience in healthcare

AU - Neal, Mary

PY - 2019/6/13

Y1 - 2019/6/13

N2 - In recent years there has been a marked increase in academic interest in the phenomenon of conscientious objection (CO) in healthcare. The resulting literature, which is already substantial and continually expanding, reflects a spectrum of opinion on the practice ranging from support through mere toleration to barely disguised (and occasionally open) hostility. Despite some forceful academic opposition, however, most scholars who engage with the issue recognise the appropriateness of accommodating CO at least to some extent. The usual way of explaining why it is necessary and/or desirable to accommodate CO involves citing the need to protect individuals from being obliged to violate their moral integrity in the course of performing their professional roles. The meaning of ‘moral integrity’ is itself the subject of detailed philosophical debate, and is not my focus in this chapter: here, I presuppose that ‘a physician’s interest in moral integrity is a very important interest that has substantial moral weight’ and that the primary reason for accommodating and exercising CO is that we recognise the value of moral integrity and wish to respect and preserve it.

AB - In recent years there has been a marked increase in academic interest in the phenomenon of conscientious objection (CO) in healthcare. The resulting literature, which is already substantial and continually expanding, reflects a spectrum of opinion on the practice ranging from support through mere toleration to barely disguised (and occasionally open) hostility. Despite some forceful academic opposition, however, most scholars who engage with the issue recognise the appropriateness of accommodating CO at least to some extent. The usual way of explaining why it is necessary and/or desirable to accommodate CO involves citing the need to protect individuals from being obliged to violate their moral integrity in the course of performing their professional roles. The meaning of ‘moral integrity’ is itself the subject of detailed philosophical debate, and is not my focus in this chapter: here, I presuppose that ‘a physician’s interest in moral integrity is a very important interest that has substantial moral weight’ and that the primary reason for accommodating and exercising CO is that we recognise the value of moral integrity and wish to respect and preserve it.

KW - conscience

KW - conscientious objection

KW - conscience-based exemptions

KW - professionalism

KW - medical law

KW - medical treatment

KW - healthcare law

KW - healthcare ethics

KW - medical ethics

UR - https://www.bloomsburyprofessional.com/uk/religious-beliefs-and-conscientious-exemptions-in-a-liberal-state-9781509920945/

M3 - Chapter

SN - 9781509920938

SN - 9781509920952

SP - 135

EP - 156

BT - Religious Beliefs and Conscientious Exemptions in a Liberal State

A2 - Adenitire, John

CY - Cambridge

ER -

Neal M. Conscientious objection, 'proper medical treatment' and professionalism: the limits of accommodation for conscience in healthcare. In Adenitire J, editor, Religious Beliefs and Conscientious Exemptions in a Liberal State. Cambridge. 2019. p. 135-156