Featured Research

from universities, journals, and other organizations

Conscience legislation ignores medical providers committed to giving patients all necessary care

Date:
October 25, 2012
Source:
Washington University in St. Louis
Summary:
Advances in medicine allow doctors to keep patients alive longer, tackle fertility problems and extend the viability of premature babies. They also lead to a growing number of moral questions for both the medical provider and patient.

Advances in medicine allow doctors to keep patients alive longer, tackle fertility problems and extend the viability of premature babies. They also lead to a growing number of moral questions for both the medical provider and patient.

"Across the country, so-called conscience legislation allows doctors and nurses to refuse to provide abortions, contraception, sterilizations, and end-of-life care," says Elizabeth Sepper, JD, health law expert and professor of law at Washington University in St. Louis. "But legislators have totally overlooked the consciences of providers who have made the conscientious judgment to deliver care and of the patients who seek these treatments."

Current laws only protect refusing providers from employment discrimination, civil actions such as malpractice, and regulatory or criminal sanctions. They also allow refusing healthcare facilities, such as hospitals, nursing homes, and clinics, to prohibit nurses and doctors from providing particular treatments due to the institution's moral or religious policies.

"Conscience is not one-sided," Sepper says. "Because existing legislation overlooks the diversity of medical providers' moral beliefs, it creates a new conflict between providers who seek to deliver care and institutions that limit care.

"For instance, Catholic healthcare facilities prohibit dispensing condoms. But a religious nurse who determines life is inviolable could find that his conscience leads him to give condoms to HIV-positive patients to save lives -- setting him up for a conflict with his employer and risking his job."

Sepper, author of "Taking Conscience Seriously," to be published in the forthcoming issue of the Virginia Law Review, notes that restrictions at refusing institutions affect a large percentage of medical providers.

Among refusing institutions, Catholic healthcare is distinguished by its size and the extent of its restrictions on reproductive healthcare, including tubal ligations, vasectomies, and fertility treatments, and end-of-life care. Yet, many healthcare institutions that assert an objection to legal, medically necessary care are not affiliated with any religion.

"Frequent mergers, changes in ownership, and consolidations mean that healthcare providers can find moral restrictions imposed at workplaces that previously allowed them to deliver care their patients need," she says. "The healthcare worker must then choose between complying with moral limits that she does not share and looking for a position elsewhere."

Alternative legal framework needed

Sepper says that conscience in the medical setting needs to be protected more consistently.

"The one-sided protection of refusal cannot stand," she says. "Just as we wouldn't say that giving students vouchers only for Christian schools furthers religious freedom, we can't say that current conscience legislation successfully lives up to its goal of protecting conscience.

"Legislators who are genuinely committed to conscience should be concerned. They should seek a better balance between doctors' consciences, institutional interests, and patients' access to care."

Sepper also strongly believes that immunizing refusing providers for harm to patients in the name of conscience protection cannot be justified.

"Conscience legislation should no longer license harming patients," she says. "If a patient is injured because of a hospital's refusal to provide care, he should be able to seek justice. Some statutes go so far as to allow providers to keep vital information from patients about their diagnosis and options. This means that, in some states, a hospital could simply not tell a woman who had been raped about emergency contraception, yet face no tort liability or sanction. This sort of deception completely undermines patients' trust in the medical profession."

Invocations of conscience are spreading to a broader array of employees and to entities removed from medical decisions, like insurance companies and employers. This past term, the U.S. Congress spent time proposing legislation entitled "Respect for Rights of Conscience Act," that would have permitted any person or entity to refuse to provide any care even if the refusal results in a patient's death. Private employers have sought exemptions from the Affordable Care Act's requirement that all insurance plans cover contraception on the grounds of conscience.

"Commentators often state that no one should have to violate his conscience. But 'conscience' often stands in for refusal to deliver abortions or contraception or to remove or withhold life support," Sepper says.

"Debates over the contraception mandate show that individuals, even within the same faith, come to different conscientious judgments about their reproductive lives. Protecting conscience means acknowledging and respecting these differences. Organizations opposed to contraception cloak their resistance in the language of conscience, but seek to prevent their employees from making their own conscientious decisions."

On Friday, Oct. 26, Sepper will address the potential for conflicts between patients, providers and healthcare facilities over the morality of medical decisions and the approach legislators might take in the future as part of the Faulkner Law Review 2012 Symposium: "Overlapping Jurisdictions: What Role for Conscience and Religion?"

A live webcast of the symposium at Faulkner University will begin at 8 a.m. Oct. 26 at http://www.faulkner.edu/jsl/flr.aspx.


Story Source:

The above story is based on materials provided by Washington University in St. Louis. Note: Materials may be edited for content and length.


Journal Reference:

  1. Elizabeth Sepper. Taking Conscience Seriously. SSRN Electronic Journal, 2012; DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.1888375

Cite This Page:

Washington University in St. Louis. "Conscience legislation ignores medical providers committed to giving patients all necessary care." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 25 October 2012. <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121025095016.htm>.
Washington University in St. Louis. (2012, October 25). Conscience legislation ignores medical providers committed to giving patients all necessary care. ScienceDaily. Retrieved September 16, 2014 from www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121025095016.htm
Washington University in St. Louis. "Conscience legislation ignores medical providers committed to giving patients all necessary care." ScienceDaily. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121025095016.htm (accessed September 16, 2014).

Share This



More Health & Medicine News

Tuesday, September 16, 2014

Featured Research

from universities, journals, and other organizations


Featured Videos

from AP, Reuters, AFP, and other news services

EU Ministers and Experts Meet to Discuss Ebola Reponse

EU Ministers and Experts Meet to Discuss Ebola Reponse

AFP (Sep. 15, 2014) The European Commission met on Monday to coordinate aid that the EU can offer to African countries affected by the Ebola outbreak. Duration: 00:58 Video provided by AFP
Powered by NewsLook.com
Despite The Risks, Antibiotics Still Overprescribed For Kids

Despite The Risks, Antibiotics Still Overprescribed For Kids

Newsy (Sep. 15, 2014) A new study finds children are prescribed antibiotics twice as often as is necessary. Video provided by Newsy
Powered by NewsLook.com
FDA Eyes Skin Shocks Used at Mass. School

FDA Eyes Skin Shocks Used at Mass. School

AP (Sep. 15, 2014) The FDA is considering whether to ban devices used by the Judge Rotenberg Educational Center in Canton, Massachusetts, the only place in the country known to use electrical skin shocks as aversive conditioning for aggressive patients. (Sept. 15) Video provided by AP
Powered by NewsLook.com
Respiratory Virus Spreads To Northeast, Now In 21 States

Respiratory Virus Spreads To Northeast, Now In 21 States

Newsy (Sep. 14, 2014) The respiratory virus Enterovirus D68, which targets children, has spread from the Midwest to 21 states. Video provided by Newsy
Powered by NewsLook.com

Search ScienceDaily

Number of stories in archives: 140,361

Find with keyword(s):
Enter a keyword or phrase to search ScienceDaily for related topics and research stories.

Save/Print:
Share:

Breaking News:
from the past week

In Other News

... from NewsDaily.com

Science News

Health News

Environment News

Technology News



Save/Print:
Share:

Free Subscriptions


Get the latest science news with ScienceDaily's free email newsletters, updated daily and weekly. Or view hourly updated newsfeeds in your RSS reader:

Get Social & Mobile


Keep up to date with the latest news from ScienceDaily via social networks and mobile apps:

Have Feedback?


Tell us what you think of ScienceDaily -- we welcome both positive and negative comments. Have any problems using the site? Questions?
Mobile: iPhone Android Web
Follow: Facebook Twitter Google+
Subscribe: RSS Feeds Email Newsletters
Latest Headlines Health & Medicine Mind & Brain Space & Time Matter & Energy Computers & Math Plants & Animals Earth & Climate Fossils & Ruins