University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, Edinburg, TX, USA.
Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
J Bioeth Inq. 2021 Mar;18(1):189-191. doi: 10.1007/s11673-020-10078-9. Epub 2021 Jan 5.
In a recent article for this journal, Bryan Pilkington (2019) makes a number of critical observations about one of our arguments for non-traditional medical conscientious objectors' duty to refer. Non-traditional conscientious objectors are those professionals who object to indirectly performing actions-like, say, referring to a physician who will perform an abortion. In our response here, we discuss his central objection and clarify our position on the role of value conflicts in non-traditional conscientious objection.
在最近为本期刊撰写的一篇文章中,Bryan Pilkington(2019 年)对我们为非传统医疗执业异议者的转诊义务提出的一个论点提出了一些批评性的看法。非传统医疗执业异议者是指那些反对间接采取行动的专业人员,例如,为将实施堕胎的医生转诊。在我们这里的回应中,我们讨论了他的核心反对意见,并澄清了我们对非传统医疗执业异议中价值冲突作用的立场。