I can see the “conscience clause” being abused by people who, far from avoiding a medical field of practice where they can expect to have ethical disagreements with patients, may seek out such a field in order to thwart the will of patients who don’t share their views.

Patients rely on medical professionals to inform them of all their legal medical options. When it comes to abortion and emergency contraception, some providers want to withhold that information, and keep the patients in the dark about the fact that they’re withholding anything. That’s not fair, and IMO should not be legal for a licensed medical professional. Part of being an ethical professional in any field is to provide your full expertise and to respect the autonomy of your clients to make decisions for themselves, even if they choose not to take your advice. If you want to enforce your values on other people, find a different job.

I should point out that while debate is indeed mostly about abortion, the regulation as written also includes “sterilization procedures” – which apparently also includes vasectomies, IUDs, implantable birth control, and dispensing birth control pills. If we were in fact just talking about abortion, I would be more conflicted about the rule. But whatever my feelings about abortion, I’m not the least bit conflicted about birth control.

http://manchmedic.blogspot.com/2009/04/whos-judging-who.html

RN q – It’s entirely okay for Kim to say she has rights, and for us to talk about what those rights mean and how best to protect them in our society. But there’s a big difference between “showing judgment” (which is a good thing) and judging others based on moral criteria to which they do not assent (which to me is fine if you’re a priest, but not if you’re a nurse). I don’t actually think Kim is doing this latter thing, but I worry that her beliefs end up being an implicit judgment on people who need her help.

If you don’t agree with the nature of your job find another job, pretty simple concept to me. I lean toward the pacifist side of the spectrum so joining the Marines would not be a good idea. If you object to prescribing medications and you are a pharmacist take up research or become a drug rep or something and stop blaming it on your faith.

Kim 1 – thanks for your comments. I feel about the same way on abortion, and I do try to appreciate how uncomfortable it must be for providers in that situation.

Kim 2 (ie Emergiblog Kim) – For the record, I don’t consider you a weasel. I probably shouldn’t post with a headache; it makes me punchy and argumentative.

I think there are entirely noble impulses behind the “Conscience Clause”. I also think those impulses are misguided, and that ends up being largely a refuge for weasels – which is probably too uncharitable a word, especially in a post where I claim to be Christian. Suffice to say, I don’t think the “Conscience Clause” protects religious freedom, so much as it allows people to avoid the necessary task of hashing out their beliefs in the world as it is.

I do think it’s reasonable – entirely unweaselly – to avoid specialties that involve morally questionable activities. That said, I think the way you framed the dilemma – “an aspect of your care that results from a decision you have made” – does imply an element of judgment, however latent or indirect. It’s perhaps more a problem of inference than implication, but that’s how I read the post.

Nope, didn’t say that. I don’t judge, I can’t. I only know what my beliefs are and where acting would cross the line for me, individually.

I was trying very hard to distinguish between my patients’ rights and mine.

You, however, make some valid points here.

What I did not put into the post, was that I have kept myself out of the position of having to make these decisions by not working in specialties where they are likely to arise to any great degree. I have never “diluted” any job. I don’t think I have, anyway.

The post was, by nature, a general response to the idea of weakening the conscience clause. And I tried very hard to keep it as neutral, and respectful, as possible.

And I never thought you considered me a “weasel” before. ; )