Non-accommodationism and conscientious objection in healthcare: A Response to Robinson

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debatepeer-review

Abstract

Michael Robinson takes issue with an 'argument from voluntariness' made by several opponents of current practices for managing conscientious objection (CO) in healthcare, including Cantor, Stahl and Emanuel, and Schuklenk, whom he characterises as 'non-accommodationists'. Here I argue that while Robinson is right to oppose the argument from voluntariness, he misunderstands current arrangements for managing CO in healthcare, and he misses the force of the non-accommodationist case against those arrangements. I also argue that despite what he says, Robinson is as much a proponent of reform of the management of CO in healthcare as are his non-accommodationist opponents. Additionally, I raise a concern about Robinson's preferred approach to managing CO in healthcare.

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere22108294
Pages (from-to)73-74
Number of pages2
JournalJournal of Medical Ethics
Volume49
Issue number1
Early online date29 Apr 2022
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jan 2023

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Non-accommodationism and conscientious objection in healthcare: A Response to Robinson'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this