Answered Conundrum Next Conundrum

keepontryi... keepontry...

Should doctors have the right to refuse to perform legal procedures on the grounds that it violates their personal conscience?

Should they be immune from lawsuits brought against them based on that refusal? Or, should all doctors be required to perform all legal procedures or face being stripped of their ability to practice? Maybe somewhere in between immunity and stripping of licensing? Perhaps we should require up-front disclosure, like "here are procedures I do not provide"?
Interesting Question? Yes (0) No (0)
RSS

Best Answer Chosen by Asker

unwirklich
unwirklich
Marked as Best! October 08, 2009 02:04 PM
Yes. Patients can always find another doctor. The same way a business owner can refuse service to whomever he/she please a doctor should be able to refuse his/her skill. No one should be forced to do something they don't find to be right, and personally law suit aside I wouldn't preform a procedure I didn't feel was right if I was a doctor. Staying true to ourselves means more than staying true to the law if the law is wrong.
Asker's Rating:
Helpful Answer? (1)   (1)
Permalink | Report
Reply
lilylorett...
lilylorett...
October 08, 2009 10:09 PM - Fact Refuted
This isn't anything to do with the law being wrong though, it's about doctors who let their personal OPINION get in the way of their JOB.
Report
keepontryi...
keepontryi...
October 11, 2009 05:10 PM
Hey unwrirklich, thanks for your response. I marked it as helpful, as this is an opinion question and your opinion should not be attacked by those who believe that only their own opinions are facts. There was no fact refuted in your answer, don't worry about it. Thanks for your response.
Report
unwirklich
unwirklich
October 11, 2009 10:29 PM
Which law isn't wrong lilly? There was no law cited here simply a situation in which the doctor felt it was wrong. It is your right to believe a law is wrong and challenge it. Once upon a time the law said you couldn't vote, once upon a time the law said black's weren't people, are these laws right? No, and someone who thought they weren't challenged them. Just because it's a law doesn't mean you have to follow it, it just means you have to be ready to face the consequences of not following it and be ready to fight for your beliefs.
Report

Other Answers (3)
Sort By

moonshadow
moonshadow
October 08, 2009 02:52 PM
No. As a doctor, you take an oath to do no harm and yet some doctors' personal beliefs could cause harm to the patient. If a doctor has a strong ethical belief that a certain procedure is in violation of, there are dozens of other fields of medicine. If you don't want to perform abortions, then don't be an ob/gyn. If you don't believe in organ transplants, don't be a surgeon. There are still plenty of medical options available to you as a professional.

However, in some parts of the country (and the world), people have access to just one doctor. The option to go to another doctor is not always available and if the doctor is putting his ethical beliefs above patients' health, then he needs to find another profession. It shouldn't be a matter of facing lawsuits. It should be a matter of the doctor realizing he cannot uphold the oath he took when graduating from medical school.
Helpful Answer? (2)   (0)
Permalink | Report
Reply
keepontryi...
keepontryi...
October 08, 2009 03:29 PM
Interesting. What should be done, if not lawsuits, to those who violate your standard and continue to practice while refusing to perform some procedures?

You might be interested to know that is no single "oath".

According to a Study of US and Canadian Medical Schools, at the time of the study, 8% of medical schools used oaths that prohibited abortion, and 14% used oaths that prohibited euthanasia.

Perhaps they shouldn't, but they do, and it may add an interesting twist to the subject.

http://www.imagerynet.com/hippo.ama.html
Report
moonshadow
moonshadow
October 08, 2009 03:39 PM
Not that I think it will happen, or am naive enough to believe that it does, but I think that persons who profess to have such strong ethics should stand by them voluntarily. I am not opposed to lawsuits or loss of their license to practice for people who steadfastly refuse to obey the law, but I would prefer to live in a country where people made ethical decisions before they impacted other people's lives.

It's not surprising that the hippocratic oath varies from med school to med school. Sad, but not surprising.

It seems to me that if a person is entering medicine for the reason of helping people, he or she should know at the onset what their ethical standards are regarding some practices and either 1) choose another specialty or 2) choose to live in a place with the same standards.
Report
keepontryi...
keepontryi...
October 08, 2009 03:41 PM
Thanks for your additional input. I find these discussions very informative. I like to learn how other people see issues.
Report
cheapgamer
cheapgamer
October 08, 2009 07:08 PM
I am in total agreement with Moonshadow. Keep, thanks for letting me know about the edited oaths . . . very interesting stuff.
Report
jillbeth
jillbeth
October 08, 2009 03:43 PM
Yes, I believe doctors should be allowed to refuse to perform procedures that they feel are unethical or immoral. Unfortunately, the medical profession has become an industry, and a humongous (often impersonal) one. Every human being should have the right to stand up for what he/she believes in, no matter what his/her profession. A patient/consumer who wants a questionable procedure done should find a doctor whose personal standards allow such a procedure. I don't believe they should face a lawsuit over a refusal, either. We already have enough frivolous lawsuits clogging our court systems.
Source(s):
personal opinion
Helpful Answer? (1)   (1)
Permalink | Report
Reply
keepontryi...
keepontryi...
October 08, 2009 11:29 PM
Thanks for your answer. I marked ti as helpful.
Report
dannyahall
dannyahall
October 09, 2009 06:07 AM
I would have to say that as I am going into practice myself eventually that doctors should definitely allow their conscience to dictate what they will and will not perform. Personally I could not perform an abortion on a twenty year old who, knowing the consequences of her actions, engages in unprotected sex on a regular basis. At the same time, however, how could I choose to refuse an abortion for the ten year old girl who was raped by her uncle or other male family member? I think that the lack of conscience is part of what has driven the medical profession down the dark path it is traveling today. Just because a procedure is legal it does not mean it is moral.

The best way for a doctor to avoid this altogether is to stay out of the field in which she or he could be placed in such a position. Even though a procedure may be legal the doctor does not have to offer it as an option in their practice.
Helpful Answer? (0)   (0)
Permalink | Report
Reply

Answer this Question


View All Health and Fitness Questions

Ask a Conundrum


140 characters left

Categories

Large Glass of Conundrum Wine

Welcome to ConundrumLand

Please enter your zip code.