RT Article
T1 Conscientious Objection or an Internal Morality of Medicine?
JF Christian bioethics
VO 27
IS 1
SP 104
OP 121
A1 Hershenov, David B.
LA English
YR 2021
UL https://ixtheo.de/Record/1752235800
AB Doctors, nurses, and pharmacists who refuse on grounds of conscience to participate in certain legal, expected, and standard practices have been accused of unprofessionally introducing their personal views into medicine. My first response is that they often are not engaging in conscientious objection because that involves invoking convictions external to those of the medical community. I contend that medicine, properly construed, is pathocentric, and so refusing to induce a pathology via abortion, contraception, euthanasia, etc., is actually being loyal to the internal morality of medicine. My second response is that even if such refusals are best considered conscientious objection, there is still no personal hijacking of medicine. Doctors refusing to induce pathologies need not refuse qua Christian, but can do so qua doctor. A pathocentric account of medicine provides a principled way of distinguishing conscientious objection from religious, idiosyncratic, and bigoted refusals. Patients’ refused pathology-inducing procedures are not medically harmed.
DO 10.1093/cb/cbaa020