Conscience Clauses and Health Care --
"Yes, we need to respect individual freedom of religion. But at what point does it cross the line of not providing essential medical care? At what point is it malpractice?" she asked. "If someone's beliefs interfere with practicing their profession, perhaps they should do something else." The Protection of Conscience Project feels differently:
Protection of Conscience Laws are needed because powerful interests are inclined to force health care workers and others to participate, directly or indirectly, in morally controversial procedures, while
NARAL says: ... Many of these clauses go far beyond respecting individuals' beliefs to the point of harming women by not providing them with full information or access to medical treatment. Medicine, not ideology, should determine medical decisions.
posted by amberglow
on Sep 17, 2004 -
69 comments
You stink, therefore I am. Philosophers and psychologists have been
studying the
science of
disgust, and its proper place in the law. Leon Kass, the chairman of the president's
council on bioethics, cites
"the wisdom of repugnance" in arguing against cloning. More recently,
Martha Nussbaum has written a new book,
"Hiding from Humanity: Disgust, Shame, and the Law," which rejects disgust as a moral guide. She has also written on the role of disgust in the
mutilations of women in Gujarat.
posted by homunculus
on Jul 17, 2004 -
8 comments
AFGHAN DRAFT CONSTITUTION WORRIES CIVIL-SOCIETY ADVOCATES Ah, the women. Again. I was unable to come up with some flash item to go with martinis so instead posted this. "The draft constitution of Afghanistan seeks stability in an ethnically diverse country whose infrastructure barely survived 22 years of constant war. It outlines a central government with a strong president and embraces principles of independent media and civil law. However, gaps in the draft worry advocates for women and for religious freedom. " And then there is the huge new opium crop.
posted by Postroad
on Nov 14, 2003 -
8 comments
