Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
×
Home

Your Morality, My Mortality: Conscientious Objection and the Standard of Care

  • BEN A. RICH
Abstract:

Recently the scope of protections afforded those healthcare professionals and institutions that refuse to provide certain interventions on the grounds of conscience have expanded, in some instances insulating providers (institutional and individual) from any liability or sanction for harms that patients experience as a result. With the exponential increase in the penetration of Catholic-affiliated healthcare across the country, physicians and nurses who are not practicing Catholics are nevertheless required to execute documents pledging to conform their patient care to the Ethical and Religious Directives for Health Care Services as a condition of employment or medical staff privileges. In some instances, doing so may result in patient morbidity or mortality or violate professional standards for respecting advance directives or surrogate decisionmaking. This article challenges the ethical propriety of such institutional mandates and argues that legal protections for conscientious refusal must provide redress for patients who are harmed by care that falls below the prevailing clinical standards.

Copyright
References
Hide All

Notes

1. Cantor, JD. Conscientious objection gone awry—restoring selfless professionalism in medicine. New England Journal of Medicine 2009;360:1484–5.

2. Goodman, E. Dispensing morality. Boston Globe 2005 Apr 9:A23.

3. Charo, RA. The celestial fire of conscience—refusing to deliver medical care. New England Journal of Medicine 2005;352(24):2471–3.

4. Harris, LH. Recognizing conscience in abortion provision. New England Journal of Medicine 2012;367:981–3.

5. Hitt, J. Who will do abortions here? New York Times Magazine 1998 Jan 18; available at http://www.nytimes.com/1998/01/18/magazine/who-will-do-abortions-here.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm (last accessed 6 Jan 2014).

6. Means v. United States Conference of Catholic Bishops et al., U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of MI 2913; available at https://www.aclu.org/reproductive-freedom-womens-rights/tamesha-means-v-united-states-conference-catholic-bishops-0 (last accessed 18 Dec 2013).

7. United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services; 2009; available at http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/health-care/upload/Ethical-Religious-Directives-Catholic-Health-Care-Services-fifth-edition-2009.pdf (last accessed 18 Dec 2013).

8. See note 7, USCCB 2009, at 12.

9. See note 7, USCCB 2009, at 19 (emphasis added).

10. American Civil Liberties Union Foundation, The MergerWatch Project. Miscarriage of Medicine: The Growth of Catholic Hospitals and the Threat to Reproductive Health Care. New York; 2013; available at https://www.aclu.org/religion-belief-reproductive-freedom/miscarriage-medicine-growth-catholic-hospitals-and-threat (last accessed 31 Dec 2013).

11. Pew Research Center Polling and Analysis. Abortion Viewed in Moral Terms; 2013 Aug 15; available at http://www.pewforum.org/2013/08/15/abortion-viewed-in-moral-terms/ (last accessed 31 Dec 2013).

12. Annas, GJ. Transferring the ethical hot potato. Hastings Center Report 1987;17:20–1, at 21.

13. Simmons v. Tuomey Regional Medical Center, 533 S.E. 2d 312 (S.C. 2000).

14. Sulmasy, DP. What is conscience and why is respect for it so important? Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 2008;29:135–49, at 135.

15. See note 14, Sulmasy 2008, at 138.

16. Wildes, KW. Institutional identity, integrity, and conscience. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 1997;7:413–19, at 416.

17. Wicclair, MR. Conscientious refusals by hospitals and emergency contraception. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 2011;20:130–8.

18. See note 10, ACLU 2013.

19. The Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life, 2014 The Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life. U.S. Religious Landscape Survey. Report 1: Religious Affiliation: Diverse and Dynamic; 2008 Feb; available at http://religions.pewforum.org/reports (last accessed 1 June 2014).

20. Wicclair, MR. Conscientious Objection in Health Care—An Ethical Analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2011, at 99100.

21. See note 14, Sulmasy 2008, at 139.

22. Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990).

23. Freedman, LR, Landy, U, Steinauer, J. When there’s a heartbeat: Miscarriage management in Catholic-owned hospitals. American Journal of Public Health 2008;98:1774–8.

24. Freedman, L. Willing but Unable: Doctor’s Constraints in Abortion Care. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press; 2010.

25. Stulberg, DB, Lawrence, RE, Shattuck, J, Curlin, FA. Religious hospitals and primary care physicians: Conflicts over policies for patient care. Journal of General Internal Medicine 2010;25:725–30, at 726.

26. See note 12, Annas 1987.

27. See note 24, Freedman 2010.

28. Ikemoto, LC. When a hospital becomes catholic. Mercer Law Review 1996;47:1087–134.

29. Catholic Health Association of America. Press Release; 2013 Dec 9; available at http://www.chausa.org/newsroom/news-releases/2013/12/09/catholic-health-association-r (last accessed 31 Dec 2013.

30. Statements from the Diocese of Phoenix and St. Joseph’s. The Arizona Republic 2010 May 15; available at http://www.azcentral.com/community/phoenix/articles/2010/05/14/20100514stjoseph0515bishop.html (last accessed 25 May 2014).

31. Pope, TM. 2010. Legal briefing: Conscience clauses and conscientious refusal. Journal of Clinical Ethics 2010;21:163–80.

32. Mississippi Health Care Rights of Conscience Act. Miss. Code Ann. § 41-107-3 2013.

33. Sepper, E. Taking conscience seriously. University of Virginia Law Review 2012;98:1501–75.

34. Swartz, MS. “Conscience clauses” or “unconscionable clauses”: Personal beliefs versus professional responsibilities. Yale Journal of Health Policy, Law, and Ethics 2006;6:269350.

35. Brownfield v. Daniel Freeman Marina Hospital, 208 Cal. App. 3d 405 (1989).

36. See note 35, Brownfield 1989, at 412.

37. See note 7, USCCB 2009, at 21–22.

38. See note 35, Brownfield 1989, at 412.

39. In the Matter of Beverly Requena, 517 A. 2d 886 (1986).

40. See note 39, Requena 1986, at 480.

41. See note 39, Requena 1986, at 484.

42. See note 39, Requena 1986, at 487.

43. See note 20, Wicclair 2011, at 99–100.

44. Boozang, KM. Deciding the fate of religious hospitals in the emerging health care market. Houston Law Review 1995;31:1429–516.

45. See note 44, Boozang 1995, at 1515.

46. Bassett, WW. Private religious hospitals: Limitations upon autonomous moral choices in reproductive medicine. Journal of Contemporary Health Law and Policy 2001;17:455583, at 565.

47. Catholic Healthcare West. Catholic Healthcare West Is Now Dignity Health; 2012 Jan 23; available athttp://www.dignityhealth.org/Dignity_Health_Information/Press_Center/223068 (last accessed 31 Dec 2013).

48. Pellegrino, ED. Toward a reconstruction of medical morality. The American Journal of Bioethics 2006;6:6571, at 69.

49. See note 48, Pellegrino 2006, at 67–8.

50. Rhodes, R. The ethical standard of care. The American Journal of Bioethics 2006;6:76–8.

51. Lynch, HF. Conflicts of Conscience in Health Care—An Institutional Compromise. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2008.

52. See note 20, Wicclair 2011, at 91–2.

The Caduceus in Court welcomes readers to submit articles on legal updates and discussions of issues in healthcare law to Ben Rich at .

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics
  • ISSN: 0963-1801
  • EISSN: 1469-2147
  • URL: /core/journals/cambridge-quarterly-of-healthcare-ethics
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed