Cargando…

Conscientious objection to participation in abortion by midwives and nurses: a systematic review of reasons

BACKGROUND: Freedom of conscience is a core element of human rights respected by most European countries. It allows abortion through the inclusion of a conscience clause, which permits opting out of providing such services. However, the grounds for invoking conscientious objection lack clarity. Our...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fleming, Valerie, Frith, Lucy, Luyben, Ans, Ramsayer, Beate
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5923188/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29703258
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-018-0268-3
_version_ 1783318281864609792
author Fleming, Valerie
Frith, Lucy
Luyben, Ans
Ramsayer, Beate
author_facet Fleming, Valerie
Frith, Lucy
Luyben, Ans
Ramsayer, Beate
author_sort Fleming, Valerie
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Freedom of conscience is a core element of human rights respected by most European countries. It allows abortion through the inclusion of a conscience clause, which permits opting out of providing such services. However, the grounds for invoking conscientious objection lack clarity. Our aim in this paper is to take a step in this direction by carrying out a systematic review of reasons by midwives and nurses for declining, on conscience grounds, to participate in abortion. METHOD: We conducted a systematic review of ethical arguments asking, “What reasons have been reported in the argument based literature for or against conscientious objection to abortion provision by nurses or midwives?” We particularly wanted to identify any discussion of the responsibilities of midwives and nurses in this area. Search terms were conscientious objection and abortion or termination and nurse or midwife or midwives or physicians or doctors or medics within the dates 2000–2016 on: HEIN legal, Medline, CINAHL, Psychinfo, Academic Search Complete, Web of Science including publications in English, German and Dutch. Final articles were subjected to a rigorous analysis, coding and classifying each line into reason mentions, narrow and broad reasons for or against conscientious objection. RESULTS: Of an initial 1085 articles, 10 were included. We identified 23 broad reasons, containing 116narrow reasons and 269 reason mentions. Eighty one (81) narrow reasons argued in favour of and 35 against conscientious objection. Using predetermined categories of moral, practical, religious or legal reasons, “moral reasons” contained the largest number of narrow reasons (n =  58). The reasons and their associated mentions in this category outnumber those in the sum of the other three categories. CONCLUSIONS: We identified no absolute argument either for or against conscientious objection by midwives or nurses. An invisibility of midwives and nurses exists in the whole debate concerning conscientious objection reflecting a gap between literature and practice, as it is they whom WHO recommend as providers of this service. While the arguments in the literature emphasize the need for provision of conscientious objection, a balanced debate is necessary in this field, which includes all relevant health professionals.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5923188
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-59231882018-05-01 Conscientious objection to participation in abortion by midwives and nurses: a systematic review of reasons Fleming, Valerie Frith, Lucy Luyben, Ans Ramsayer, Beate BMC Med Ethics Research Article BACKGROUND: Freedom of conscience is a core element of human rights respected by most European countries. It allows abortion through the inclusion of a conscience clause, which permits opting out of providing such services. However, the grounds for invoking conscientious objection lack clarity. Our aim in this paper is to take a step in this direction by carrying out a systematic review of reasons by midwives and nurses for declining, on conscience grounds, to participate in abortion. METHOD: We conducted a systematic review of ethical arguments asking, “What reasons have been reported in the argument based literature for or against conscientious objection to abortion provision by nurses or midwives?” We particularly wanted to identify any discussion of the responsibilities of midwives and nurses in this area. Search terms were conscientious objection and abortion or termination and nurse or midwife or midwives or physicians or doctors or medics within the dates 2000–2016 on: HEIN legal, Medline, CINAHL, Psychinfo, Academic Search Complete, Web of Science including publications in English, German and Dutch. Final articles were subjected to a rigorous analysis, coding and classifying each line into reason mentions, narrow and broad reasons for or against conscientious objection. RESULTS: Of an initial 1085 articles, 10 were included. We identified 23 broad reasons, containing 116narrow reasons and 269 reason mentions. Eighty one (81) narrow reasons argued in favour of and 35 against conscientious objection. Using predetermined categories of moral, practical, religious or legal reasons, “moral reasons” contained the largest number of narrow reasons (n =  58). The reasons and their associated mentions in this category outnumber those in the sum of the other three categories. CONCLUSIONS: We identified no absolute argument either for or against conscientious objection by midwives or nurses. An invisibility of midwives and nurses exists in the whole debate concerning conscientious objection reflecting a gap between literature and practice, as it is they whom WHO recommend as providers of this service. While the arguments in the literature emphasize the need for provision of conscientious objection, a balanced debate is necessary in this field, which includes all relevant health professionals. BioMed Central 2018-04-27 /pmc/articles/PMC5923188/ /pubmed/29703258 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-018-0268-3 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Fleming, Valerie
Frith, Lucy
Luyben, Ans
Ramsayer, Beate
Conscientious objection to participation in abortion by midwives and nurses: a systematic review of reasons
title Conscientious objection to participation in abortion by midwives and nurses: a systematic review of reasons
title_full Conscientious objection to participation in abortion by midwives and nurses: a systematic review of reasons
title_fullStr Conscientious objection to participation in abortion by midwives and nurses: a systematic review of reasons
title_full_unstemmed Conscientious objection to participation in abortion by midwives and nurses: a systematic review of reasons
title_short Conscientious objection to participation in abortion by midwives and nurses: a systematic review of reasons
title_sort conscientious objection to participation in abortion by midwives and nurses: a systematic review of reasons
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5923188/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29703258
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-018-0268-3
work_keys_str_mv AT flemingvalerie conscientiousobjectiontoparticipationinabortionbymidwivesandnursesasystematicreviewofreasons
AT frithlucy conscientiousobjectiontoparticipationinabortionbymidwivesandnursesasystematicreviewofreasons
AT luybenans conscientiousobjectiontoparticipationinabortionbymidwivesandnursesasystematicreviewofreasons
AT ramsayerbeate conscientiousobjectiontoparticipationinabortionbymidwivesandnursesasystematicreviewofreasons