Dr. Wolfgang Schneider

Thank you for inviting feedback regarding the proposed amendments to the Conscientious Objection standard. I am in full agreement that the CPSA has: "Based on initial feedback received, the term ‘effective referral’ will be removed from the Conscientious Objection standard." Most of the points that I would make have already been provided by others in the comments that I have reviewed. I would like to add the following. There is the concept of moral injury to those who are coerced to participate in actions that violate their conscience. This has been well documented in the Moral Injury Project 2014. This involved military ethics. I do not believe it is a stretch to say that health care professionals (also being humans) would not be similarly adversely affected if they were compelled to act against their conscience. See Hanna 2005 which documented the adverse psychological effects on nurses who were compelled to participate against their conscience in elective abortions. To compel a health care practitioner to participate in an action that violates their conscience is to do violence to that practitioner. I believe that the referral method (for abortion and MAID)currently in place is a reasonable compromise between patient rights and the practitioners' right to exercise their clinical and moral judgment. Thank you.

Comments for this post are now closed. If you would like to share your feedback on this topic, please email support@cpsa.ca.

« Previous EntryNext Entry »