rss
J Med Ethics 2009;35:471-472 doi:10.1136/jme.2009.030411
  • Controversy

Federal provider conscience regulation: unconscionable

  1. R Card
  1. Dr R Card, SUNY/University of Rochester Medical Center, 601 Elmwood Avenue, Box 676, Rochester, NY 14642, USA; robert_card{at}urmc.rochester.edu
  • Received 20 March 2009
  • Revised 20 March 2009
  • Accepted 19 May 2009

Abstract

This paper argues that the provider conscience regulation recently put into place in the USA is misguided. The rule is too broad in the scope of protection it affords, and its conception of what constitutes assistance in the performance of an objectionable procedure reveals that it is unworkable in practice. Furthermore, the regulation wrongly treats refusal of other reproductive services as on a par with conscientious objection to participation in abortion. Finally, the rule allows providers to refuse even to discuss “objectionable” options with patients and serves to protect discriminatory refusals of medical care. For all of these reasons, this regulation is unwise.

Footnotes

  • Competing interests: None.

  • Provenance and peer review: Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

This Article

  1. Abstract
  2. Full text
  3. PDF

Responses

  1. Submit a response
  2. No responses published

Google Scholar

  1. Articles by Card, R.

Register for free content

The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.

Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.