Religion and conscientious objection: A survey of pharmacists’ willingness to dispense medications

Davidson, Laura A.; Pettis, Clare T.; Joiner, Amber J.; Cook, Daniel M.; Klugman, Craig M.

doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.03.027

Cited by 56 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These findings support what others have found, that religion and spiritual beliefs influence how nurses and health care providers in general make ethical decisions. 15,25,27 Ethical beliefs are values that nurses bring to the professional setting and are often strongly engrained from childhood. It is unrealistic to expect that nurses will ignore these belief systems when faced with ethical dilemmas.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…25 Similarly, a study of 4000 British physicians found that those who were not religious were almost two times more willing than physicians with devout religious beliefs to discuss treatments that hasten death with dying patients. 15 In an interview published by Nursing Standard, 26 Dr Clive Seale who conducted the above-mentioned study suggests that this same impact of religious beliefs might also influence how nurses practice.…”

Section: Influencers Of Ethical Beliefsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Influencers of ethical beliefs and the impact on moral distress and conscientious objection

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Considering a growing nurse shortage and the need for qualified nurses to handle increasingly complex patient care situations, how ethical beliefs are influenced and the consequences that can occur when moral conflicts of right and wrong arise need to be explored. The aim of this study was to explore influencers identified by nurses as having the most impact on the development of their ethical beliefs and whether these influencers might impact levels of moral distress and the potential for conscientious objection. Nurses whose ethical beliefs were most influenced by their religious beliefs scored higher in levels of moral distress and demonstrated greater differences in areas of conscientious objection than did nurses who developed their ethical beliefs from influencers such as family values, life and work experience, political views or the professional code of ethics.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Influencers Of Ethical Beliefsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influencers of ethical beliefs and the impact on moral distress and conscientious objection

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Antiel et al (2014) explore the determinants of physicians' views on the contraception mandate and find that several key variables are related to support for it, including sex, region, political ideology, religious affiliation, and religious participation. Moreover, other scholars have considered the role of religion in shaping how health-care professionals address medical practices to which they have a conscientious objection, primarily as it relates to abortion, emergency contraception, and contraception (Davidson et al 2010;Lawrence et al 2011;Nordstrand et al 2013).…”

Section: Attitudes Toward Contraception Policy and The Hhs Mandatementioning

confidence: 99%

The Clash of Rights: Explaining Attitudes toward a Religious Exemption to the HHS Contraception Mandate

Holmes

Garand

2018

APSC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) contraception mandate associated with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) has been a contentious issue that has created clash-of-rights claims between advocates of reproductive freedom and advocates of religious freedom. Americans differ considerably in their views toward whether religiously affiliated institutions that object to the use of contraceptives should be granted an exemption to the HHS contraception mandate. This article explores the determinants of Americans' support for or opposition to the religious exemption. We focus particularly on the effects of individuals' religious orientations, gender, and political attitudes that generate support for competing rights claims. Using data from a 2012 Pew Research Center survey, we (surprisingly) find little evidence of a gender effect. Rather, we find that support for the religious exemption is driven largely by church attendance and moral conservatism, with adherence to specific religious traditions having relatively minor effects. We also find that support for the religious exemption to the HHS contraception mandate is influenced by political variables (i.e., partisanship and ideology, attitudes toward President Obama, and Tea Party support) and demographic attributes (i.e., number of children in a given household, racial/ethnic identity, education, and age). We conclude that the clash of values over the contraception mandate is driven largely by religion and political attitudes.

show abstract

“…S. 507 (1997 El alcance y contenido de la objeción de conciencia en el contexto sanitario en el ordenamiento jurídico estadounidense ha estado supeditado en gran medida a la atipicidad de su modelo sanitario, especialmente si se le compara con la realidad europea donde los modelos sanitarios están fuertemente vinculados al Estado social 89 . La alternancia política de republicanos y demócratas también ha desempeñado un papel importante en este terreno.…”

Section: La Objeción De Conciencia Sanitariaunclassified

La objeción de conciencia farmacéutica. Análisis comparativo de los modelos español y estadounidense

Angón

2017

Derecho Político

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Resumen:El objeto de este estudio es analizar la objeción de conciencia farmacéutica tanto en nuestra reciente doctrina constitucional como en la jurisprudencia del Tribunal Supremo federal estadounidense y del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos, para intentar explicar la coherencia (o incoherencia) de nuestro modelo de objeción de conciencia farmacéutica con el marco constitucional, así como en qué medida la posición de nuestro Tribunal Constitucional se asemeja a la de lostribunales referidos.La elección del modelo estadounidense se debe a que este ordenamiento jurídico tiene una dilatada experiencia en la regulación y resolución de conflictos relacionados con la objeción de conciencia; y en el caso concreto de la objeción de conciencia farmacéutica el Tribunal Supremo federal acaba de pronunciarse sobre un supuesto planteado en términos muy similares al resuelto en la STC 145/2015, aunque utilizando una receta muy diferente a la nuestra para resolver el conflicto entre norma y conciencia.La primera parte del artículo analiza la naturaleza jurídica de la objeción de conciencia en nuestro ordenamiento jurídico, así como las decisiones de nuestro Tribunal Constitucional en este terreno. Esto nos permitirá conocer cuál es la relación entre la libertad de conciencia y la objeción de conciencia, así como en qué medida es necesario que el legislador reconozca expresamente la posibilidad de que los individuos no cumplan con aquello que señala el ordenamiento jurídico por motivos de conciencia, para hablar de un hipotético derecho a la objeción de conciencia.La segunda parte se dedica al análisis del modelo constitucional estadounidense,y al estudio de las decisiones del Tribunal Supremo federal en el terreno de la objeción de conciencia en el contexto sanitario, incluyéndose en este apartado su posición sobre la objeción de conciencia del personal farmacéutico.El artículo concluye ofreciendo una serie de reflexiones acerca de las diferentes respuestas que los modelos estudiados proponen, y su respectivo encaje constitucional. En este sentido, hay que destacar que nuestro Tribunal Constitucional ha dado el peligroso paso de reconocer a los farmacéuticos el derecho a no dispensar la píldora del día después por motivos de conciencia, con una decisión que está llamada a tener especial relevancia en la futura conformación de la objeción de conciencia en nuestro ordenamiento jurídico. Con esta decisión nos alejamos de las soluciones que han adoptado otros países de nuestro entorno jurídico, y que habían sido avaladas por el TEDH; asimismo,se ignoran las valiosas lecciones del modelo estadounidense, el cual ha intentado no sacrificar y armonizar los bienes jurídicos en juego, articulando mecanismos que garantizan la correcta prestación del servicio público.Abstract:This paper analyzes the responses of the Spanish legal system, in contrast to the jurisprudence of the US Federal Supreme Court and the European Court of Human Rights, to a refusal by pharmacists to dispense drugs for reasons of conscience. In this context are studied: the Spanish jurisprudence and constitutional doctrine, the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, and the most important decisions of the US federal Courts. It attempts to explain the consistency (or inconsistency) of our model of pharmaceutical conscientious objection to the constitutional framework, and to what extent the position of our Constitutional Court resembles that of the courts utilized for comparison.The choice of the American model is due to this legal system’s extensive experience in the regulation and resolution of conflicts related to conscientious objection. Indeed, in the specific case of pharmaceutical conscientious objection, the Federal Supreme Court recently ruled on a case based on issues very similar to those determined in the STC 145/2015 case, although utilizing a very different methodology from ours in order to resolve the conflict between norm and conscience.The first part of the article analyses the legal nature of conscientious objection in our legal system, and the decisions of our Constitutional Court in this field. This permits us to understand the relationship between freedom of conscience and conscientious objection, and to what extent it is necessary that legislators expressly recognize the possibility that individuals will not comply with the law on grounds of conscience, so that we may speak of a hypothetical right to conscientious objection.The second part of the article is devoted to the analysis of the American constitutional model in the field of freedom of conscience, and especially the study of the decisions by the Federal Supreme Court on the grounds of conscientious objection in the context of health. Included in this section are its positions on conscientious objection by pharmaceutical staff.The article concludes by offering a series of reflections on the different responses suggested by the models studied, and their respective constitutional relevance. In this regard, it is noteworthy that our Constitutional Court has taken the dangerous step of recognizing the right of pharmacists to refuse to dispense the morning-after pill for reasons of conscience, a decision that will be called to play a particularly important role in shaping the future of conscientious objection inour legal system, and which relegates to the rights of women in this field to a secondary status. With this decision we move away from the solutions that other countries in our legal environment have adopted, and that furthermore had been endorsed by the ECHR. Similarly, our legal system ignore the valuable lessons of the American model, which has attempted to not sacrifice -but rather to harmonize- the legal interests at stake, thus articulating mechanisms that ensure the proper provision of public service.

show abstract

Religion and conscientious objection: A survey of pharmacists’ willingness to dispense medications

Cited by 56 publications

References 19 publications

Influencers of ethical beliefs and the impact on moral distress and conscientious objection

Influencers of ethical beliefs and the impact on moral distress and conscientious objection

The Clash of Rights: Explaining Attitudes toward a Religious Exemption to the HHS Contraception Mandate

La objeción de conciencia farmacéutica. Análisis comparativo de los modelos español y estadounidense

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About