Literature DB >> 17287479

Religion, conscience, and controversial clinical practices.

Farr A Curlin1, Ryan E Lawrence, Marshall H Chin, John D Lantos.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There is a heated debate about whether health professionals may refuse to provide treatments to which they object on moral grounds. It is important to understand how physicians think about their ethical rights and obligations when such conflicts emerge in clinical practice.
METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of a stratified, random sample of 2000 practicing U.S. physicians from all specialties by mail. The primary criterion variables were physicians' judgments about their ethical rights and obligations when patients request a legal medical procedure to which the physician objects for religious or moral reasons. These procedures included administering terminal sedation in dying patients, providing abortion for failed contraception, and prescribing birth control to adolescents without parental approval.
RESULTS: A total of 1144 of 1820 physicians (63%) responded to our survey. On the basis of our results, we estimate that most physicians believe that it is ethically permissible for doctors to explain their moral objections to patients (63%). Most also believe that physicians are obligated to present all options (86%) and to refer the patient to another clinician who does not object to the requested procedure (71%). Physicians who were male, those who were religious, and those who had personal objections to morally controversial clinical practices were less likely to report that doctors must disclose information about or refer patients for medical procedures to which the physician objected on moral grounds (multivariate odds ratios, 0.3 to 0.5).
CONCLUSIONS: Many physicians do not consider themselves obligated to disclose information about or refer patients for legal but morally controversial medical procedures. Patients who want information about and access to such procedures may need to inquire proactively to determine whether their physicians would accommodate such requests. Copyright 2007 Massachusetts Medical Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17287479      PMCID: PMC2867473          DOI: 10.1056/NEJMsa065316

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  N Engl J Med        ISSN: 0028-4793            Impact factor:   91.245


  14 in total

Review 1.  Four models of the physician-patient relationship.

Authors:  E J Emanuel; L L Emanuel
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1992 Apr 22-29       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  Conscience in context: pharmacist rights and the eroding moral marketplace.

Authors:  Robert K Vischer
Journal:  Stanford Law Pol Rev       Date:  2006

Review 3.  Conscientious objection in medicine.

Authors:  Julian Savulescu
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2006-02-04

4.  Religion index for psychiatric research.

Authors:  H Koenig; G R Parkerson; K G Meador
Journal:  Am J Psychiatry       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 18.112

5.  The association of physicians' religious characteristics with their attitudes and self-reported behaviors regarding religion and spirituality in the clinical encounter.

Authors:  Farr A Curlin; Marshall H Chin; Sarah A Sellergren; Chad J Roach; John D Lantos
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 2.983

6.  Metaphors and models of doctor-patient relationships: their implications for autonomy.

Authors:  J F Childress; M Siegler
Journal:  Theor Med       Date:  1984-02

7.  Beyond medical paternalism and patient autonomy: a model of physician conscience for the physician-patient relationship.

Authors:  D C Thomasma
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1983-02       Impact factor: 25.391

8.  Searching for moral certainty in medicine: a proposal for a new model of the doctor-patient encounter.

Authors:  M Siegler
Journal:  Bull N Y Acad Med       Date:  1981 Jan-Feb

9.  Personal religious orientation and prejudice.

Authors:  G W Allport; J M Ross
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  1967-04

10.  Religious characteristics of U.S. physicians: a national survey.

Authors:  Farr A Curlin; John D Lantos; Chad J Roach; Sarah A Sellergren; Marshall H Chin
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 5.128

View more
  81 in total

1.  Obstetrician-gynecologists' objections to and willingness to help patients obtain an abortion.

Authors:  Lisa H Harris; Alexandra Cooper; Kenneth A Rasinski; Farr A Curlin; Anne Drapkin Lyerly
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 7.661

2.  Physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia: can you even imagine teaching medical students how to end their patients' lives?

Authors:  J Donald Boudreau
Journal:  Perm J       Date:  2011

3.  Obstetrician-gynecologists' views on contraception and natural family planning: a national survey.

Authors:  Ryan E Lawrence; Kenneth A Rasinski; John D Yoon; Farr A Curlin
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2010-11-11       Impact factor: 8.661

4.  Medically Inappropriate or Futile Treatment: Deliberation and Justification.

Authors:  Cheryl J Misak; Douglas B White; Robert D Truog
Journal:  J Med Philos       Date:  2015-12-17

5.  Predictors of Physician Recommendation for Ethically Controversial Medical Procedures: Findings from an Exploratory National Survey of American Muslim Physicians.

Authors:  Sundus Mahdi; Obadah Ghannam; Sydeaka Watson; Aasim I Padela
Journal:  J Relig Health       Date:  2016-04

6.  Devotion, Diversity, and Reasoning: Religion and Medical Ethics.

Authors:  Michael D Dahnke
Journal:  J Bioeth Inq       Date:  2015-09-01       Impact factor: 1.352

7.  The personal is political, the professional is not: conscientious objection to obtaining/providing/acting on genetic information.

Authors:  Joel Frader; Charles L Bosk
Journal:  Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet       Date:  2009-02-15       Impact factor: 3.908

8.  God and genes in the caring professions: clinician and clergy perceptions of religion and genetics.

Authors:  Virginia L Bartlett; Rolanda L Johnson
Journal:  Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet       Date:  2009-02-15       Impact factor: 3.908

9.  Religious and spiritual issues in medical genetics.

Authors:  Joseph B Fanning; Ellen Wright Clayton
Journal:  Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet       Date:  2009-02-15       Impact factor: 3.908

10.  Institutional futility policies are inherently unfair.

Authors:  Philip M Rosoff
Journal:  HEC Forum       Date:  2013-09
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.