The FSRH guideline on conscientious objection disrespects patient rights and endangers their health
暂无分享,去创建一个
We write to offer feedback on the new Faculty of Sexual & Reproductive Healthcare (FSRH) guideline1 on conscientious objection (CO) that was the subject of an editorial2 in the January 2018 issue of this journal. Our position, for which we have a clear evidence base, is set out below.
Essential parts of the new FSRH guideline,1 as well as the reasoning behind it, contradict the available evidence around the practice of CO, so we predict that the guideline will largely fail in practice.
We have written extensively on the problem of so-called CO in reproductive healthcare.3 The available evidence clearly shows that CO is a violation of medical ethics and patients’ rights, has no place in reproductive healthcare, and has misleadingly been co-opted from military CO. CO in healthcare is about imposing one’s religious or personal beliefs, including any negative …
[1] J. Hatfield,et al. Conscientious objection in sexual and reproductive health – a guideline that respects diverse views but emphasises patients’ rights , 2017, BMJ Sexual & Reproductive Health.
[2] C. Fiala,et al. There is no defence for 'Conscientious objection' in reproductive health care. , 2017, European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology.