Literature DB >> 23848269

Conscientious objection and induced abortion in Europe.

Anna Heino1, Mika Gissler, Dan Apter, Christian Fiala.   

Abstract

The issue of conscientious objection (CO) arises in healthcare when doctors and nurses refuse to have any involvement in the provision of treatment of certain patients due to their religious or moral beliefs. Most commonly CO is invoked when it comes to induced abortion. Of the EU member states where induced abortion is legal, invoking CO is granted by law in 21 countries. The same applies to the non-EU countries Norway and Switzerland. CO is not legally granted in the EU member states Sweden, Finland, Bulgaria and the Czech Republic. The Icelandic legislation provides no right to CO either. European examples prove that the recommendation that CO should not prevent women from accessing services fails in a number of cases. CO puts women in an unequal position depending on their place of residence, socio-economic status and income. CO should not be presented as a question that relates only to health professionals and their rights. CO mainly concerns women as it has very real consequences for their reproductive health and rights. European countries should assess the laws governing CO and its effects on women's rights. CO should not be used as a subtle method for limiting the legal right to healthcare.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23848269     DOI: 10.3109/13625187.2013.819848

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care        ISSN: 1362-5187            Impact factor:   1.848


  14 in total

Review 1.  The Challenges of Conscientious Objection in Health care.

Authors:  Hasan Shanawani
Journal:  J Relig Health       Date:  2016-04

2.  Conscientious objection to abortion: how to strike a legal and ethical balance between conflicting rights?

Authors:  Francesca Negro; Maria Cristina Varone; Alessandro Del Rio; Susanna Marinelli; Giuseppe Basile
Journal:  Acta Biomed       Date:  2022-08-31

3.  Opinions on conscientious objection to induced abortion among Finnish medical and nursing students and professionals.

Authors:  Petteri Nieminen; Saara Lappalainen; Pauliina Ristimäki; Markku Myllykangas; Anne-Mari Mustonen
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2015-03-25       Impact factor: 2.652

4.  Development of a Conceptual Model and Survey Instrument to Measure Conscientious Objection to Abortion Provision.

Authors:  Laura Florence Harris; John Koku Awoonor-Williams; Caitlin Gerdts; Laura Gil Urbano; Ana Cristina González Vélez; Jodi Halpern; Ndola Prata; Peter Baffoe
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-10-13       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Conscientious objection to participation in abortion by midwives and nurses: a systematic review of reasons.

Authors:  Valerie Fleming; Lucy Frith; Ans Luyben; Beate Ramsayer
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2018-04-27       Impact factor: 2.652

6.  Experiences of women who travel for abortion: A mixed methods systematic review.

Authors:  Jill Barr-Walker; Ruvani T Jayaweera; Ana Maria Ramirez; Caitlin Gerdts
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-04-09       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Quotas: Enabling Conscientious Objection to Coexist with Abortion Access.

Authors:  Daniel Rodger; Bruce P Blackshaw
Journal:  Health Care Anal       Date:  2020-11-19

8.  Abortion debates in Finland and the Republic of Ireland: textual analysis of experiential thinking and argumentation in parliamentary and layperson discussions.

Authors:  Anne-Mari Mustonen; Tommi Paakkonen; Esko Ryökäs; Petteri Nieminen
Journal:  Reprod Health       Date:  2017-12-02       Impact factor: 3.223

9.  Accommodating conscientious objection in the midwifery workforce: a ratio-data analysis of midwives, birth and late abortions in 18 European countries in 2016.

Authors:  Valerie Fleming; Clare Maxwell; Beate Ramsayer
Journal:  Hum Resour Health       Date:  2020-06-08

10.  Conscientious objection to abortion, the law and its implementation in Victoria, Australia: perspectives of abortion service providers.

Authors:  Louise Anne Keogh; Lynn Gillam; Marie Bismark; Kathleen McNamee; Amy Webster; Christine Bayly; Danielle Newton
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2019-01-31       Impact factor: 2.652

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.