Conscientious Objections

Historically associated with military service, conscientious objection has become a significant phenomenon in health care. Mark Wicclair offers a comprehensive ethical analysis of conscientious objection in three representative health care professions: medicine, nursing and pharmacy. He critically examines two extreme positions: the 'incompatibility thesis', that it is contrary to the professional obligations of practitioners to refuse provision of any service within the scope of their professional competence; and 'conscience absolutism', that they should be exempted from performing any action contrary to their conscience. He argues for a compromise approach that accommodates conscience-based refusals within the limits of specified ethical constraints. He also explores conscientious objection by students in each of the three professions, discusses conscience protection legislation and conscience-based refusals by pharmacies and hospitals, and analyzes several cases. His book is a valuable resource for scholars, professionals, trainees, students, and anyone interested in this increasingly important aspect of health care.

In a series of feisty and ultimately hopeful essays, one of America's sharpest social critics casts a shrewd eye over contemporary culture to reveal the worst -- and the best -- of our habits of discourse, tendencies in education, and obsessions with technological novelty. Readers will find themselves rethinking many of their bedrock assumptions: Should education transmit culture or defend us against it? Is technological innovation progress or a peculiarly American addiction? When everyone watches the same television programs -- and television producers don't discriminate between the audiences for Sesame Street and Dynasty -- is childhood anything more than a sentimental concept? Writing in the traditions of Orwell and H.L. Mencken, Neil Postman sends shock waves of wit and critical intelligence through the cultural wasteland.

In Western countries conscientious objection is usually accommodated in various ways, at least in certain areas (military conscription, medicine) and to some extent. It appears to be regarded as fundamentally different from other kinds of objection. But why? This study argues that conscientious objection cannot be understood as long as conscience is misunderstood. The author provides a new interpretation of the historical development of expressions of conscience and thought on the subject, and offers a new approach to conscientious objection rooted in the symbol-approach to conscience.

This study clarifies to which extent it is legitimate, in view of freedom of conscience and religion, to sanction individuals for refusing to take part in an activity they claim to be incompatible with their moral or religious convictions.

The term “conscientious objector” was not in use during the Civil War, but the concept certainly existed. This engrossing volume is an authoritative, thoroughly researched study of the whole problem of objection to warfare on religious or moral grounds, as it existed during the Civil War. The author covers five major areas: the types of individuals and which religious denominations were actually opposed to the war on conscientious grounds; what efforts were made on behalf of objectors and what changes took place in their political status; the attitude of the civil and military authorities toward objectors; the number of objectors; and, finally, a comparison of the problem of conscientious objection in the Civil War with the same problem as it existed for the United States during the First World War. The facts presented in this volume are of historical interest; the conclusions the author draws, however, are, if anything, more relevant and important today than they were during any other period in American history.

This book argues that a conscientiously objecting medical professional should receive an exemption only if the grounds of an objector’s refusal are reasonable. It defends a detailed, contextual account of public reasonability suited for healthcare, which builds from the overarching concept of Rawlsian public reason. The author analyzes the main competing positions and maintains that these other views fail precisely due to their systematic inattention to the grounding reasons behind a conscientious objection; he argues that any such view is plausible to the extent that it mimics the ‘reason-giving requirement’ for conscience objections defended in this work. Only reasonable objections can defeat the prior professional obligation to assign primacy to patient well-being, therefore one who refuses a patient’s request for a legally available, medically indicated, and safe service must be able to explain the grounds of their objection in terms understandable to other citizens within the public institutional structure of medicine. The book further offers a novel policy proposal to deploy the Reasonability View: establishing conscientious objector status in medicine. It concludes that the Reasonability View is a viable and attractive position in this debate. A New Theory of Conscientious Objection in Medicine: Justification and Reasonability will be of interest to researchers and advanced students working in bioethics, medical ethics, and philosophy of medicine, as well as thinkers interested in the intersections between law, medical humanities, and philosophy.

This study examines the changing motives and patterns of conscientious objection as well as state policies toward objectors in the Western world.

Explores the multifaceted debate on the interconnection between conscientious objections, religious liberty, and the equality of women and sexual minorities.