The WaPo calls it "health workers' rights..." Aren't we really talking about conscientious objection...?

today's wapo features a front-page article entitled, "health workers' choice debated..." this topic has grown steadily in public awareness since news stories of pharmacists refusing to fill prescriptions for birth control and "morning-after" pills began hitting the media...

More than a dozen states are considering new laws to protect health workers who do not want to provide care that conflicts with their personal beliefs, a surge of legislation that reflects the intensifying tension between asserting individual religious values and defending patients' rights.

About half of the proposals would shield pharmacists who refuse to fill prescriptions for birth control and "morning-after" pills because they believe the drugs cause abortions. But many are far broader measures that would shelter a doctor, nurse, aide, technician or other employee who objects to any therapy. That might include in-vitro fertilization, physician-assisted suicide, embryonic stem cells and perhaps even providing treatment to gays and lesbians.

when i arrived here in s.e. europe nearly a week ago and was watching euronews, i was surprised to see a story on this very same issue currently under discussion in slovakia under the label "conscientious objection..."

An attempt by the Vatican to reduce the number of abortions in Slovakia has raised concerns in the European Union about the loss of rights for women. A draft treaty between Slovakia and the Holy See would allow hospital staff to refuse to do abortions or fertility treatment on religious grounds. A panel of EU lawyers says this could restrict the rights of those who want them in such a firmly Catholic nation.

Pope Benedict XVI has vowed to take a tough line on issues such as abortion. The draft treaty, drawn up in 2003, says it is based on "recognising the freedom of conscience in the protection and promotion of values intrinsic to the meaning of human life". Slovakia is said to be 70% Catholic but abortion is legal up to the 12th week of pregnancy.

[...]

But Professor Olivier De Schutter, the head of the panel of lawyers from the EU Network of Independent Experts on Fundamental Rights, says the articles relating to religious conscientious objection raise the most concern. He said it was "far-reaching, considering a very large majority of healthcare providers in Slovakia are Catholics and might exercise their right to conscientious objection".

i am a firm supporter of conscientious objection, a term that is customarily used to describe those whose religious beliefs prevent them from participating in the sanctioned killing exercises we call war... when the issue of the pharmacists refusing to prescribe certain types of prescriptions first surfaced, i was troubled... i am even more troubled now...

it seems inevitable to me that the term "conscientious objection" will be applied to this issue... it is only a matter of time before "conscientious objection" becomes the rallying cry for religious fundamentalists in the u.s... where, i would like to know, will be the end to it...? there is nothing, to my way of thinking, that cannot be accepted or rejected on religious grounds... for every human action, someone will be able to cite a so-called religious authority to either sanction or oppose it... it's not as if we weren't already living in interesting times... they're about to get a lot MORE interesting...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet