Card R
SUNY/University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY 14642, USA.
J Med Ethics. 2009 Aug;35(8):471-2. doi: 10.1136/jme.2009.030411.
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.
本文认为,美国最近实施的医疗服务提供者良心规制是错误的。该规则所提供的保护范围过于宽泛,而且其对构成在实施令人反感的程序中提供协助的理解表明,它在实践中是行不通的。此外,该规制错误地将拒绝提供其他生殖服务等同于出于良心拒斥参与堕胎。最后,该规则允许医疗服务提供者甚至拒绝与患者讨论“令人反感的”选项,并为歧视性地拒绝提供医疗服务提供保护。基于所有这些原因,这项规制是不明智的。