Conflicts of conscience in health care : an institutional compromise
著者
書誌事項
Conflicts of conscience in health care : an institutional compromise
（Basic bioethics series）
MIT Press, c2008
- : hbk
大学図書館所蔵 件 / 全3件
-
該当する所蔵館はありません
- すべての絞り込み条件を解除する
注記
Includes bibliographical references and index
収録内容
- A primer on conscience clauses
- Defining medical professionalism
- Moral diversity in medicine and the ideal of doctor-patient matching
- Which institution?: licensing boards bearing the burdens of conscience and access
- Measuring patient demand and determining which demands to meet
- Measuring physician supply and limiting the grounds for physician refusal
- Calibrating supply and demand
- The "hard" cases: when the institutional solution fails
- Physician obligations and sacrifices
- Addressing skeptics, a model statute, and conclusions
内容説明・目次
内容説明
Physicians in the United States who refuse to perform a variety of legally permissible medical services because of their own moral objections are often protected by "conscience clauses." These laws, on the books in nearly every state since the legalization of abortion by Roe v. Wade, shield physicians and other health professionals from such potential consequences of refusal as liability and dismissal. While some praise conscience clauses as protecting important freedoms, opponents, concerned with patient access to care, argue that professional refusals should be tolerated only when they are based on valid medical grounds. In Conflicts of Conscience in Health Care, Holly Fernandez Lynch finds a way around the polarizing rhetoric associated with this issue by proposing a compromise that protects both a patient's access to care and a physician's ability to refuse. This focus on compromise is crucial, as new uses of medical technology expand the controversy beyond abortion and contraception to reach an increasing number of doctors and patients.
Lynch argues that doctor-patient matching on the basis of personal moral values would eliminate, or at least minimize, many conflicts of conscience, and suggests that state licensing boards facilitate this goal. Licensing boards would be responsible for balancing the interests of doctors and patients by ensuring a sufficient number of willing physicians such that no physician's refusal leaves a patient entirely without access to desired medical services. This proposed solution, Lynch argues, accommodates patients' freedoms while leaving important room in the profession for individuals who find some of the capabilities of medical technology to be ethically objectionable.
「Nielsen BookData」 より