To whom it may concern, I am an advocate for regular policy updates to improve patient care (as in your profession), or to improve engineering excellence (as in my profession). However, the Draft Standard of Practice on Conscientious Objection, as currently worded, seems to suggest a practitioner must be required to refer patients to medical procedures they themselves may not agree with, whether morally or otherwise. This is itself a moral standard and imposes a form of active participation in these medical procedures. Would it not be enough simply to require practitioners to refer patents to another practitioner, if necessary? Having a multiplicity of medical professionals, each with their own moral standards (rather than an imposed standard) would allow patients the freedom to select practitioners that best align with their individual needs. It would also prevent practitioners from vacating their practice simply because they have a particular guiding principle. I urge you to reject or amend the current markup that requires doctors to refer patients for any medical procedure in which they have a moral objection. Considerately, Ian Swentek