Hughes, J (2017) Conscientious objection, professional duty and compromise: A response to Savulescu and Schuklenk. Bioethics, 32 (2). pp. 126-131. ISSN 1467-8519

Warning
There is a more recent version of this item available.
[thumbnail of Conscientious objection, professional duty & compromise. A response to Savulescu & Schuklenk (Final Accepted Manuscript, Bioethics).docx] Text
Conscientious objection, professional duty & compromise. A response to Savulescu & Schuklenk (Final Accepted Manuscript, Bioethics).docx - Accepted Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial.

Download (57kB)

Abstract

In a recent article in this journal, Savulescu and Schuklenk defend and extend their earlier arguments against a right to medical conscientious objection in response to criticisms raised by Cowley. I argue that while it would be preferable to be less accommodating of medical conscientious than many countries currently are, Savulescu and Schuklenk's argument that conscientious objection is ‘simply unprofessional’ is mistaken. The professional duties of doctors should be defined in relation to the interests of patients and society, and for reasons set out in this article, these may support limited accommodation of conscientious objection on condition that it does not impede access to services. Moreover, the fact that conscientious objection appears to involve unjustifiable compromise from the objector's point of view is not a reason for society not to offer that compromise. Arguing for robust enforcement of the no‐impediment condition, rather than opposing conscientious objection in principle, may be a more effective way of addressing the harms resulting from an over‐permissive conscientious objection policy.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: This is the accepted author manuscript (AAM). The final published version (version of record) is available online via Wiley at https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12410 Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher
Subjects: B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > BJ Ethics
Divisions: Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences > School of Politics, Philosophy, International Relations and Environment
Depositing User: Symplectic
Date Deposited: 30 Aug 2017 11:15
Last Modified: 24 Nov 2019 01:30
URI: https://eprints.keele.ac.uk/id/eprint/3954

Available Versions of this Item

Actions (login required)

View Item
View Item