HEC Forum

, Volume 24, Issue 2, pp 63–82 | Cite as

Abortion: At the Still Point of the Turning Conscientious Objection Debate

Article
  • 397 Downloads

Abstract

Abortion is the central issue in the conscientious objection debate. In this article I demonstrate why this is so for two philosophical viewpoints prominent in American culture. One, represented by Patrick Lee and Robert P. George, holds that the fundamental moral value of being human can be found in bare life and the other, represented by Tom Beauchamp and James Childress, holds that this fundamental value is found in the life that can choose and determine itself. First, I articulate Lee and George’s philosophical theory and demonstrate how the fundamental moral value of their theory, personhood, is represented in the issue of abortion. Second, I examine Beauchamp and Childress’ theoretical vision and demonstrate how their fundamental moral value, the right to autonomous self-determination, is represented in abortion. Third, I sketch the theoretical and practical dynamics of the conscientious objection debate as well as each author’s understanding of conscience. Fourth, I demonstrate how abortion, which represents their respective fundamental value, shapes each perspectives’ approach to the conscientious objection debate. I conclude that because each theory finds its fundamental value represented in the issue of abortion, each perspective is bound to engage the conscientious objection debate in a way that centers on the issue of abortion.

Keywords

Abortion Conscientious objection Personhood Self-determination 

References

  1. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. (2007). ACOG Committee Opinion No. 385 November 2007: The limits of conscientious refusal in reproductive medicine. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 110(5), 1203–1208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aristotle. (1998). The Nicomachean ethics. In Oxford world classics (D. Ross, Trans.). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Aristotle. (2009). Politics. In Oxford world classics (E. Barker, Trans.). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2009). Principles of biomedical ethics (6th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Cantor, J. D. (2009). Conscientious objection gone awry—restoring selfless professionalism in medicine. New England Journal of Medicine, 360(15), 1484–1486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Charo, R. A. (2005). The celestial fire of conscience—refusing to deliver medical care. New England Journal of Medicine, 352(24), 2471–2473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Childress, J. F. (1990). The place of autonomy in bioethics. The Hastings Center Report, 20(1), 12–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Connery, S. J. J. R. (1977). Abortion: The development of the Roman Catholic perspective. Chicago: Loyola University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Engelhardt, H. T., Jr. (1991). Rights to health care: Created, not discovered. In T. J. Bolle III & W. B. Bondeson (Eds.), Rights to health care. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  10. Engelhardt, H. T., Jr. (1999). The foundations of bioethics (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Gillon, R. (2003). Ethics needs principles, four can encompass the rest, and respect for autonomy should be “first among equals”. Journal of Medical Ethics, 29(5), 307–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lee, P., & George, R. (2005). The wrong of abortion. In A. I. Cohen & C. H. Wellman (Eds.), Contemporary debate in applied ethics. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Lee, P., & George, R. P. (2008). Body-self dualism in contemporary ethics and politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Savulescu, J. (2006). Conscientious objection in medicine. British Medical Journal, 332(7536), 294–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Savulescu, J. (2007). The proper place of values in the delivery of medicine. American Journal of Bioethics, 7(12), 21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Sulmasy, D. P. (2008). What is conscience and why is respect for it so important? Theoretical Medicine & Bioethics, 29(3), 135–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Thompson, J. J. (2006). A defense of abortion. In H. Kuhse & P. Singer (Eds.), Bioethics: An anthology (2nd ed.). Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Albert Gnaegi Center for Health Care EthicsSaint Louis UniversitySt. LouisUSA
  2. 2.Ethics DepartmentAscension HealthSt. LouisUSA

Personalised recommendations