NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, New York.
Bioethics. 2022 Jan;36(1):63-70. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12943. Epub 2021 Aug 31.
The debate over whether the medical profession should accommodate its members' conscientious objections (COs) has raged on in the bioethics literature and on legislative floors for decades. Unfortunately, participants on all sides of the debate fail to distinguish among different types of CO, a failure that obstructs the view of which cases warrant accommodation and why. In this paper, we identify one type of CO that warrants consideration for accommodation, called Nature of Medicine COs (NoMCOs). NoMCOs involve the refusal of physicians to perform actions they reasonably judge to be contrary to the nature of medicine and their professional obligations. We argue that accommodating NoMCOs can be justified based on the profession's need to preserve reformability. Importantly, this previously underdeveloped position evades some of the concerns commonly raised by opponents of CO accommodations.
几十年来，关于医疗行业是否应该顺应其成员的良心反对意见（COs）的争论一直在生物伦理学文献和立法层面上激烈进行。不幸的是，辩论各方都未能区分不同类型的 CO，这种失败阻碍了人们了解哪些案例需要适应以及为什么需要适应。在本文中，我们确定了一种需要考虑适应的 CO，称为医学性质的 CO（NoMCOs）。NoMCOs 涉及医生拒绝执行他们合理判断为违反医学性质和专业义务的行为。我们认为，基于专业需要保持可改革性，适应 NoMCOs 是合理的。重要的是，这一先前未充分发展的立场回避了反对 CO 适应的人通常提出的一些关切。
