Conscientious objection and healthcare in the UK: why tribunals are not the answer
A recent issue of the journal Bioethics discussed whether conscientious objectors within the healthcare context should be required to give their reasons to a specially convened tribunal, who would have the power to reject the objection. This is modeled on the context of military conscription. Advoca...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Electronic Article |
Language: | English |
Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
Journals Online & Print: | |
Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
Published: |
BMJ Publ.
2016
|
In: |
Journal of medical ethics
Year: 2016, Volume: 42, Issue: 2, Pages: 69-72 |
Online Access: |
Volltext (JSTOR) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
MARC
LEADER | 00000caa a22000002 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | 1816152811 | ||
003 | DE-627 | ||
005 | 20230426115836.0 | ||
007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
008 | 220908s2016 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
024 | 7 | |a 10.1136/medethics-2015-102692 |2 doi | |
035 | |a (DE-627)1816152811 | ||
035 | |a (DE-599)KXP1816152811 | ||
040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rda | ||
041 | |a eng | ||
084 | |a 1 |2 ssgn | ||
100 | 1 | |a Cowley, Christopher |e VerfasserIn |4 aut | |
245 | 1 | 0 | |a Conscientious objection and healthcare in the UK: why tribunals are not the answer |
264 | 1 | |c 2016 | |
336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
520 | |a A recent issue of the journal Bioethics discussed whether conscientious objectors within the healthcare context should be required to give their reasons to a specially convened tribunal, who would have the power to reject the objection. This is modeled on the context of military conscription. Advocates for such a tribunal offer two different justifications, one based on determining the genuineness of the applicant's beliefs, the other based on determining their reasonableness. I limit my discussion to a doctor's objection to abortion in the UK, and argue against both justifications: I thereby defend the status quo, where such doctors are not formally required to defend their beliefs. My argument has to do with the particular nature of the abortion debate in the UK, and the more general nature of ethical disagreement. | ||
773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Journal of medical ethics |d London : BMJ Publ., 1975 |g 42(2016), 2, Seite 69-72 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)323607802 |w (DE-600)2026397-1 |w (DE-576)260773972 |x 1473-4257 |7 nnns |
773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:42 |g year:2016 |g number:2 |g pages:69-72 |
856 | |3 Volltext |u http://www.jstor.org/stable/44014302 |x JSTOR | ||
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2015-102692 |x Resolving-System |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://jme.bmj.com/content/42/2/69.abstract |x Verlag |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
935 | |a mteo | ||
951 | |a AR | ||
ELC | |a 1 | ||
ITA | |a 1 |t 1 | ||
LOK | |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 | ||
LOK | |0 001 4185606753 | ||
LOK | |0 003 DE-627 | ||
LOK | |0 004 1816152811 | ||
LOK | |0 005 20220908053652 | ||
LOK | |0 008 220908||||||||||||||||ger||||||| | ||
LOK | |0 035 |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2022-08-03#00131F5BCB1EDFB3A13EFE816879095A24EC8283 | ||
LOK | |0 040 |a DE-Tue135 |c DE-627 |d DE-Tue135 | ||
LOK | |0 092 |o n | ||
LOK | |0 852 |a DE-Tue135 | ||
LOK | |0 852 1 |9 00 | ||
LOK | |0 866 |x JSTOR#http://www.jstor.org/stable/44014302 | ||
LOK | |0 935 |a ixzs |a ixrk |a zota | ||
OAS | |a 1 |b inherited from superior work | ||
ORI | |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw |