Article Text
Abstract
This paper offers a qualified defence of physician non-compliance with antiabortion legislation in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. The paper examines two ethically troubling trends of post-Dobbs legislation: narrow and vague maternal health exemption clauses and mandatory reporting of miscarriages in jurisdictions where patients may criminal prosecution for medically induced abortions. It then examines and defends a professional obligation on the part of physicians to comply with the law. This obligation, however, is defeasible. The paper then argues that physicians’ obligations to comply with the law is defeated when the law is illegitimate and following the law would constitute bad medical practice. Finally, it argues that the ethically troubling trends in post-Dobbs antiabortion legislation may meet these criteria.
- Abortion - Induced
- Contraception
- Criminal Law
- Ethics- Medical
- Reproductive Medicine
Data availability statement
Data sharing not applicable as no datasets generated and/or analysed for this study.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Data availability statement
Data sharing not applicable as no datasets generated and/or analysed for this study.
Footnotes
Correction notice Since this paper first published, reference 12 has been updated.
Contributors JM drafted the sections on risks to patients from maternal health exemptions and mandatory reporting, and contributed revisions and ideas to the remaining sections. PR drafted the remaining sections, was responsible for preparing the final manuscript, and is the guarantor of the project.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Conscientious commitment, professional obligations and abortion provision after the reversal of Roe v Wade
- Reasons, reasonability and establishing conscientious objector status in medicine
- A narrative review of challenges related to healthcare worker rights, roles and responsibilities in the provision of sexual and reproductive services in health facilities
- Not quite a doctor, but should I help? A qualitative exploration of medical students’ attitudes towards responding to medical emergencies that occur in the public domain
- Vaccine mandates for healthcare workers beyond COVID-19
- Why I wrote my advance decision to refuse life-prolonging treatment: and why the law on sanctity of life remains problematic
- Conscientious refusals to refer: findings from a national physician survey
- A surrogate’s secrets are(n’t) safe with me: patient confidentiality in the care of a gestational surrogate
- Ethical, professional, and legal obligations in clinical practice: a series of discussion topics for postgraduate medical education Introduction and topic 1:informed consent
- Conscientious objection and the referral requirement as morally permissible moral mistakes