Most arguments about conscientious objections in medicine fail to capture the full scope and complexity of the concept before drawing conclusions about their permissibility in practice. Arguments favoring and disfavoring the accommodation of conscientious objections in practice tend to focus too narrowly on prima facie morally contentious treatments and religious claims of conscience, while further failing to address the possibility of moral perspectives changing over time. In this paper, I argue that standard reasons against permitting conscientious objections in practice-that their permission may result in harm to patients, the idea that medical providers willingly enter into the medical field, and that conscientious objections stand contrary to medical professionalism-do not apply in all cases and that the medical field and health systems in which many physicians now practice should continue to tolerate conscientious objections in practice.
Keywords: Conscientious objection; Harm; Liberalism; Religion and medicine.
© 2019. Springer Nature B.V.