Right Of Conscientious Objection Research Articles

Democratic Illusions: The Protestant Campaign for Conscientious Objection in the Early Federal Republic of Germany

AbstractDuring the early-Cold-War controversy over West German rearmament, the Protestant Church emerged as a center of activism for the right of conscientious objection to military service, departing from decades of precedent. This article uses the dramatic about-face of the Protestant Church to throw new light on how West Germans reimagined democratic politics after Nazism. Building on recent challenges to paradigms of postwar liberalization, it argues that illusory narratives of the Nazi past played a key role in West Germany's transition to democracy. Protestant activists for the right of conscientious objection drew on an imagined legacy of anti-Nazi resistance to reframe the idea of “conscience,” long associated with patriotic loyalties, as a uniquely Protestant contribution to democratic culture. In doing so, they came to identify their church as a pillar of West German democracy, even as they ensconced tendentious accounts of the Nazi past in postwar law and politics.

Mental health nursing and conscientious objection to forced pharmaceutical intervention.

This paper attempts a critical discussion of the possibilities for mental health nurses to claim a particular right of conscientious objection to their involvement in enforced pharmaceutical interventions. We nest this within a more general critique of perceived shortcomings of psychiatric services, and injustices therein. Our intention is to consider the philosophical and practical complexities of making demands for this conscientious objection before arriving at a speculative appraisal of the potential this may hold for broader aspirations for a transformed or alternative mental health care system, more grounded in consent than coercion. We consider a range of ethical and practical dimensions of how to realize this right to conscientious objection. We also rely upon an abolition democracy lens to move beyond individual ethical frameworks to consider a broader politics for framing these arguments.

Exploring pharmacists' views surrounding conscientious objection to abortion and implications in practice.

General Pharmaceutical Council standards (UK) state 'pharmacy professionals have the right to practise in line with their religion, personal values or beliefs as long as they …make sure that person-centred care is not compromised', indicating a potential conflict for pharmacists who wish to exercise their right to conscientious objection (CO) to abortion while maintaining a duty of care to their patients. The objective of this study was to explore pharmacists' views of conscientious objection to abortion and whether this included the supply of EC and the impact on practice. Eighteen UK pharmacists were interviewed using semistructured interviews. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, imported into NVivo11 and analysed using thematic analysis. Five themes were identified: beliefs as to what constitutes abortion, influences on beliefs, conflicts of conscience, accommodating conscience and professional obligations. Views were polarised in relation to the role of emergency contraception (EC) as an abortifacient. Religion was often viewed as the reason underpinning CO to abortion. Conflicts in relation to CO to abortion included the role of referral and EC and employability for objectors. Some pharmacists viewed their role of providing patient choice as incompatible with the right of CO to abortion. This study shows the conflicts and challenges surrounding CO to abortion in professional pharmacy practice. While the majority of pharmacists believe CO to abortion should and could be accommodated, this can prove challenging in certain working environments, both in relation to ensuring a duty of care to patients is upheld and due to the ongoing debate concerning EC and whether it has a definitive role in abortion or not.

Luther’s Contribution to the Just War Tradition

Luther appropriated much of the Medieval “just war” tradition, although he also reduced the legitimate grounds for war and made original contributions, including a rejection of crusades and an assertion of the right of conscientious objection. His critical reception and contributions emanated from his distinction between the two kingdoms as well as his teaching on the three orders of creation.

Voluntary assisted dying: should conscientious objection be unconditional?

This paper argues that although legislation on voluntary assisted dying should always allow medical practitioners to practise conscientious objection, there should always be an obligation on the conscientious objector to refer anyone who inquires about voluntary assisted dying to other medical practitioners who have no conscientious objection. The paper refutes the concern that this requirement effectively undermines the conscientious objector's right to object, explaining exactly why this concern is misplaced.

Libertad de conciencia y objeción de conciencia de establecimientos privados de salud: bases conceptuales para su interpretación constitucional

Este artículo se dirige a examinar la conexión conceptual que existe entre conciencia, libertad de conciencia y objeción de conciencia. Lo último se realizará mediante una reconstrucción del significado de tales conceptos. A partir de esto, se sentarán las bases para un concepto de objeción de conciencia que no descansará principalmente en el principio de no daño a terceros, sino en un examen de las alternativas disponibles en el caso concreto. Luego, se explicarán las bases para la aplicación del test de razonabilidad para determinar el alcance del derecho a la objeción de conciencia y la deseabilidad de atribuir la titularidad de tal derecho a establecimientos privados de salud.

Reasonable Accommodation of Conscientious Objection in Health Care Is Morally and Legally Required

While mainstream, establishment medical journals have published opinion pieces condemning conscientious refusals in medical care, American law has consistently and repeatedly supported a right to such refusals. Law has not relied on a particular philosophical basis for health care. Indeed, legal precedents reject any monolithic model, whether based on consumerism or on professional obligations. Law focuses on the coexistence of diverse understandings, motivations, and delivery models. Scholarly approaches tend to ignore the fact that, fundamentally, conscientious objection involves a minority telling the majority that the objector(s) cannot ethically participate according to the majority's preferred model or set of rules. Religious liberty is protected in the US by applying strict scrutiny. Any governmental burden on religious liberty must further a compelling governmental interest and be implemented using the least restrictive means reasonably available. After years of scholarly controversy, strict scrutiny continues to be the law. The moral basis for the legal right of conscientious objection has been affirmed and expanded by Hobby Lobby in 2014, outlined in an Attorney General Memorandum in 2017, and codified in a Final Conscience Rule by the Department of Health and Human Services in May 2019.

Teaching to Prevent Unjust War

This essay describes an undergraduate course, “Christian Ethics of War and Peace,” taught for more than two decades at a Catholic university. I first situate the course within the debate between just war philosophers Michael Walzer and Jeff McMahan on the moral equivalency of soldiers and the right of conscientious objection to unjust war. The development of SCO (selective conscientious objection) in the Catholic tradition is traced from Augustine to John Paul II. The Sic et Non of Abelard is invoked as a precedent for the course pedagogy, in which students are asked to develop and articulate their own personal conscience in light of the long-standing tension between arguments for pacifism and for just war. Borrowing from contemporary cognitive psychology, this task is described as one of “reflective judgment” regarding an “ill-structured problem.” The major writing assignment is described and one student’s testimony on its challenge is offered.

The historical evolution of the right of conscientious objection to military service in the UN human rights system: 1950-2017

This paper discusses the emergence and historic development of the right to conscientious objection to military service within the United Nations framework for the protection of human rights, through the drafting history of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 1966. It further explores conscientious objection as a fundamental aspect of the right to manifest one's thought, conscience and religion and it outlines the jurisprudence of the UN Human Rights Committee in relation to conscientious objection to military service from 1981 to 2017 to illustrate the Committee's changing approach to the matter and its steps to ensure compliance with international human rights standards. This paper contributes to academic knowledge by exploring the semantic restraints of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and casting light on the delayed response of the UN human rights system in adopting a more liberal approach to the interpretation of the Covenant, which finally recognised - through its monitoring bodies - that conscientious objection to military service is an integral part of the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.

The historical evolution of the right of conscientious objection to military service in the UN human rights system: 1950-2017

The historical evolution of the right of conscientious objection to military service in the UN human rights system: 1950-2017

Hak Menolak Wajib Militer: Catatan atas RUU Komponen Cadangan Pertahanan Negara

The military service agenda proposed Components of the National Defense Bill sows controversy. The absence of protection of citizens who exercised their right of conscientious objection to military service could potentially lead to violations of human rights if the military service must be implemented as it happens in other countries. Guarantee the protection of conscientious objection as part of the civil and political rights is a necessity if the government want to impose military service, considering Indonesia had acknowledged the existence of conscientious objector in the history of its military service policy.

General Comment No 22 on the Right to Freedom of Thought, Conscience and Religion

596Human rights — Freedom of thought, conscience and religion — Scope — Broadening of scope to include right of conscientious objection — Article 18 of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966

Reflexiones sobre la despenalización del aborto en México

Hace aproximadamente cinco años, se aprobó por la Asamblea de Representantes del Distrito Federal la despenalización del aborto en el D. F. Esta situación hace reflexionar acerca de la condición moral y ética de los representantes que elegimos para que salvaguardaran nuestros intereses en la Cámara de Diputados. ¿A quién le preguntaron si estábamos de acuerdo con la modificación del Código Penal? ¿Cómo influirá en la práctica de enfermería esta nueva ley que obliga a las enfermeras a participar en actos contrarios a sus creencias y principios? ¿Dónde quedó el respeto al derecho de objeción de conciencia de los profesionales de salud? Son preguntas que quedarán por resolverse. Lo que sí es necesario hacer es un análisis de la situación desde el punto de vista ético-legal, y las implicaciones que acarrea para la práctica profesional. El presente ensayo hace una reflexión sobre los aspectos éticos y morales que se deben de cuestionar las enfermeras cuando les toque enfrentar alguna situación como la que se está tratando; así mismo, se realizará un resumen de las leyes, tanto nacionales como internacionales que protegen al no nacido y que fueron pasadas por alto para aprobar el decreto que despenaliza al aborto en el Distrito Federal.

Conscientious Objection and the Morning‐After Pill

abstractThe so‐called ‘morning‐after pill’ is a drug that prevents pregnancy if taken no later than 72 hours after presumably fertile sexual intercourse. This article argues against a right of conscientious objection for pharmacists with regard to dispensing this drug. Some arguments that might be advanced in support of this right will be considered and rejected. Section 2 argues that from a philosophical point of view, the most relevant question is not whether the morning‐after pill prevents implantation nor is it whether preventing implantation is tantamount to abortion. Section 3 suggests a more general philosophical question as most pertinent, namely whether and to what extent a pharmacist can justifiably be exempted from dispensing the morning‐after pill when to do so would entail participating in something that goes against his or her deepest moral or religious convictions. Section 4 explains why, within liberal institutions, pharmacists should not have the right to conscientious objection to dispensing the morning‐after pill.

Notes on Church-State Affairs

The European Court of Human Rights ruled in favor of the rights of conscientious objectors in two cases on January 10, 2012. The cases concerned Hayk Bukharatyan and Ashot Tsaturyan, who were sentenced to two years in jail in 2003. In 2001, Armenia promised the Council of Europe that it would institute a meaningful form of alternative service, but it has failed to do so. Recently, five more arrests have been made for refusal to serve for religious reasons. Azerbaijan enacted even more legal restrictions on religious liberty. People who produce or distribute religious literature without going through prior state censorship could face prison terms of two to five years or fines up to the equivalent of nine years of the country's minimum wage. Authorities in Nagorno-Karabakh, an unrecognized government located entirely within the boundaries of Azerbaijan, sentenced Karen Harutyunyna, a Jehovah's Witness, to thirty years in prison for refusing military service. The constitution of Nagorno-Karabakh approved by referendum in December 2006 does not recognize the right of conscientious objection.

THE NEED FOR BALANCING THE REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS OF WOMEN AND THE UNBORN IN THE MEXICAN COURTROOM

On 28 August 2008, the plenary session of the Supreme Court of Mexico endorsed a groundbreaking judgment on abortion law in Mexico.1 It upheld as constitutional the amendment of the local Criminal Code by the Mexico City Legislative Assembly in April 2007. The amending provisions permitted elective termination of pregnancy before the end of the twelfth week of gestation.2 It also added clauses 16 Bis 6 and 14 Bis 8 to the local health law act stipulating that the Mexico City Ministry of Health, through its health providers (i.e. public hospitals and clinics), should provide first-trimester abortion services at no cost to Mexico City residents and for a moderate fee to women from outside the city. Historically, abortion in Mexico City has been severely restricted; it was not allowed even in cases of rape. From 2000 onwards, however, gradual changes to the local Criminal Code were implemented when feminist and pro-choice groups initiated strong campaigns supporting the right of women to make decisions about their own bodies. In August 2000, abortion was exempted from penalty when the mother's life was at risk or when there was a severe congenital conditions affecting the foetus.3 A further key change was in January 2004, when the Criminal Code advanced the notion that women's consent was central to abortion issues by incorporating a clause providing that abortion was permissible when a woman is artificially inseminated without her consent. It also incorporated the right of conscientious objection for health providers.4 Campaigners highlighted the high number of ‘back-street’ abortions sought by poor, rural, adolescent, and indigenous women and stressed the significance of this as a social problem. The most recent Mexico City Criminal Code amendments were considered a major step in reducing maternal mortality by eliminating the need for women to seek clandestine abortions.

Is it ethical for a general practitioner to claim a conscientious objection when asked to refer for abortion?

Abortion is one of the most divisive topics in healthcare. Proponents and opponents hold strong views. Some health workers who oppose abortion assert a right of conscientious objection to it,...

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

Conscientious objection (CO) to genetic testing raises serious questions about what it means to be a health-care professional (HCP). Most of the discussion about CO has focused on the logic of moral arguments for and against aspects of CO and has ignored the social context in which CO occurs. Invoking CO to deny services to patients violates both the professional's duty to respect the patient's autonomy and also the community standards that determine legitimate treatment options. The HCP exercising the right of CO may make it impossible for the patient to exercise constitutionally guaranteed rights to self-determination around reproduction. This creates a decision-making imbalance between the HCP and the patient that amounts to an abuse of professional power. To prevent such abuses, professionals who wish to refrain from participating have an obligation to warn prospective patients of their objections prior to establishing a professional-patient relationship or, if a relationship already exists, to arrange for alternative care expeditiously.

Selective Conscientious Objection in the Aftermath of Iraq: Reconsidering Objection to a Specific War

Although a right of conscientious objection to military service became widely recognised within the twentieth century, selective conscientious objection has always proven more controversial. In the aftermath of fresh claims of selective conscientious objection arising out of the Iraq ‘war’, and what is argued to be a changing context to conflict and conscientious objection, this paper sets out to reconsider the case for granting protection to military personnel who object to deployment within specific conflict situations. It is contended that in principle selective conscientious objectors should be afforded recognition by the law in the same way that absolute conscientious objectors can be. However, although it is possible to establish limited grounds upon which such a right might be recognised, the perceived constitutional consequences of such an approach make it highly unlikely that selective conscientious objection will be treated sympathetically by either courts or government.

Feticide and late termination of pregnancy: five levels of ethical conflict

Technological advances in medicine have changed the landscape of fetal medicine considerably. Growing knowledge in fetal physiology, ultrasound, antenatal screening and an emphasis on preventive medicine promotes the detection of a wide range of abnormalities leaving both parents and obstetricians with difficult choices at various stages during pregnancy. Early terminations are ethically controversial. However, late terminations (>20 weeks gestation) and feticide (including post-viable fetuses) have advanced the debate on the ethics of abortion. Poignant ethical questions surround the status of the fetus as opposed to that of the newborn.While most regulations regard severe fetal abnormalities as being incompatible with life and having the potential to cause severe pain and suffering after birth, slippery-slope arguments are raised when feticide is performed for abnormalities like cleft lip and palate. Respecting the autonomy of the mother who may request a termination late in her pregnancy raises enormous ethical conflict for the treating obstetrician who must balance this request against the principle of non-malfeasance (doing no harm) inherent in killing a viable fetus. There is a clear moral distinction between actively killing an abnormal viable fetus and allowing an abnormal newborn to die after birth. This distinction may be lacking in policy-making in countries with a permissive feticide policy and a restrictive neonatal policy in respect of non-treatment. Furthermore, where feticide is concerned, do obstetricians have a right of conscientious objection globally? At a more complex level, destruction of a viable fetus with significant abnormalities raises concerns of eugenics. Is feticide and late termination of pregnancy discriminatory towards people with disabilities and a veiled attempt to create a genetically pure population? This paper explores the ethical conflict and legal inconsistency in feticide and late termination of pregnancy at a global level and argues for a universal policy based on fetal status and acknowledgment of the moral distinction between killing and letting die. Keywords: Ethics; Feticide; Late termination of pregnancy O & G Forum Vol. 18 (3) 2008: pp. 93-95