HHS Issues Revised Health Worker Conscience Rule

Karen Roush

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.naj.0001010532.15126.e4

2024-03-21

Abstract:The aim is to balance the rights of clinicians and patients.

nursing

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Freedom of Conscience in Health Care: Distinctions and Limits

Sean Murphy,Stephen J. Genuis

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-013-9451-x

2013-06-21

Journal of Bioethical Inquiry

Abstract:The widespread emergence of innumerable technologies within health care has complicated the choices facing caregivers and their patients. The escalation of knowledge and technical innovation has been accompanied by an erosion of moral and ethical consensus among health providers that is reflected in the abandonment of the Hippocratic Oath as the immutable bedrock of medical ethics. Ethical conflicts arise when the values of health professionals collide with the expressed wishes of patients or the dictates of regulatory bodies and administrators. Increasing attempts by groups outside of the medical profession to limit freedom of conscience for health providers has raised concern and consternation among some health professionals. The personal and professional impact of health professionals surrendering freedom of conscience and participating in actions they deem malevolent or unethical has not been adequately studied and may not be inconsequential when considering the recognized impact of other circumstances of coerced complicity. We argue that the distinction between the two ways that freedom of conscience is exercised (avoiding a perceived evil and seeking a perceived good) provides a rational basis for a principled limitation of this fundamental freedom.

ethics,medical ethics,social issues,social sciences, biomedical
Conscience, Disobedience, and Standard of Care

Stephen R Latham

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/hast.4903

Abstract:In the article "Principled Conscientious Provision: Referral Symmetry and Its Implications for Protecting Secular Conscience," Abram L. Brummett, Tanner Hafen, and Mark C. Navin reject what they call the "referral asymmetry" in U.S. conscientious objection law in medicine, which recognizes rights of conscientiously objecting physicians to withhold referrals for medical interventions but does not (yet) recognize rights of physicians to make referrals for medical interventions to which they are morally committed but to which their health care institutions are morally opposed. This commentary concentrates on a second asymmetry, namely, the relationship of a health care provider's referral or nonreferral to the medical standard of care. The commentary argues that this second asymmetry seems to require action more appropriately recognized as civil disobedience than conscientious provision of referral.
Complying with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. Privacy standards

A W Shuren,K Livsey

Abstract:The Privacy Rule: Limits the use and disclosure of PHI to purposes of treatment, payment, or routine health care operations. Requires covered entities to provide advance notice to the public of its policy governing disclosure of PHI. Requires entities covered by the Standard to secure general client consent to use and to disclose PHI for treatment, payment, or routine health care operations and to obtain specific client authorization to use or to disclose PHI for all other purposes unless the disclosure is specifically permitted without consent or authorization (e.g., a covered entity may disclose PHI to a health care oversight agency such as the Office of the Inspector General without first obtaining client authorization). In certain situations, a covered entity need only obtain client agreement to disclose PHI which may be oral or inferred from the circumstances surrounding the disclosure. For example, a covered entity could disclose PHI to a relative caring for the individual who is the subject of the health information. Expects covered entities to take measures to protect PHI from both inadvertent and deliberate misuse and disclosure. Requires, except in certain circumstances, the amount of PHI disclosed on any occasion to be limited to the minimum necessary to achieve the purpose of the disclosure. Gives individuals more control of their health information by permitting them to review and amend health information pertaining to themselves and to demand an accounting of persons to whom their health information has been disclosed. Establishes terms under which a covered entity may disclose PHI to a business associate. Permits states to maintain state laws that are more stringent than the Privacy Rule. The statute provides for significant civil and criminal penalties for failure to comply with the Standards. Violations are punishable by fines as much as $250,000 and 10 years imprisonment. The HHS, Office of Civil Rights is charged with enforcing the Standards. The HHS is expected to issue a single Enforcement Rule applicable to all three of the HIPAA Administrative Simplification Standards. Many worksite records will not be protected under the HIPAA Privacy Rule because employers are not covered entities and few occupational health professionals meet the criteria of being considered a covered entity. Nevertheless, occupational health professionals need to be knowledgeable about the application of HIPAA in the occupational health care setting. Furthermore, given that the Rule does not preempt state privacy laws that are more stringent than the Standards, occupational health professionals should monitor legislative activity related to privacy in the states in which they practice. To date, Oregon, Texas, and New Jersey have broadened HIPAA's definitions to create more covered entities and services.
Harmonizing conscience claims and patient access to assisted death

Eric Wasylenko

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/08404704231158701

Abstract:The rights of patients to receive legally permissible interventions sometimes conflict with enshrined rights of providers to object, for reasons of conscience, to providing those interventions. Getting the balance right is challenging. But reasonable balance to manage these conflicting imperatives can be achieved in the design of programs for assisted death. Rather than limiting the discourse to the platform of competing individual rights, health leaders are urged to consider the broader societal benefits and impacts of valuing conscience in the practice of medicine, the creation of regulation and policy, and the delivery of healthcare. A method to determine that conscience claims are "genuine," "reasonable," and "acceptable" needs developing. A list of criteria toward this determination is offered.
Conscientious Objection to Providing Gender Health Care in Pediatric Training: Balancing the Vulnerability of Transgender Youth and the Vulnerability of Pediatric Residents

Karen L Teelin,Catherine D Shubkin,Amy E Caruso Brown

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2021.09.018

Abstract:Within pediatric graduate medical education, the care of transgender youth presents opportunities for deepening learners' understanding of equity, access, the role of the physician as an advocate, and health disparities caused by stigma and minority stress. However, when a pediatric resident objects to providing health care to this uniquely vulnerable population owing to their personal beliefs and values, how should pediatrician-educators respond? Important reasons to respect healthcare professionals' conscience have been described in the scholarly literature; however, equally important concerns have also been raised about the extent to which conscientious objection should be permitted in a pluralistic society, particularly given power differentials that favor healthcare professionals and grants them a monopoly over certain services. In the context of medical education, however, residents are in a unique position: they are simultaneously learners and employees, and although privileged relative to their patients, they are also vulnerable in relation to the hierarchy of healthcare and of institutions. We must find a compassionate balance between nurturing the evolving conscience of students and trainees and protecting the health and well-being of our most vulnerable patients. Educators have an obligation to foster empathy, mitigate bias, and mentor their learners, regardless of beliefs, but in some cases, they may recognize that there are limits: patients' welfare ultimately takes precedence and trainees should be guided toward alternative career paths. We explore the limits of conscientious objection in medical training and propose a framework for pediatrician-educators to support learners and patients in challenging circumstances.
Professional responsibility, nurses, and conscientious objection: A framework for ethical evaluation

Pamela J Grace,Elizabeth Peter,Vicki D Lachman,Norah L Johnson,Deborah J Kenny,Lucia D Wocial

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/09697330231180749

Abstract:Conscientious objections (CO) can be disruptive in a variety of ways and may disadvantage patients and colleagues who must step-in to assume care. Nevertheless, nurses have a right and responsibility to object to participation in interventions that would seriously harm their sense of integrity. This is an ethical problem of balancing risks and responsibilities related to patient care. Here we explore the problem and propose a nonlinear framework for exploring the authenticity of a claim of CO from the perspective of the nurse and of those who must evaluate such claims. We synthesized the framework using Rest's Four Component Model of moral reasoning along with tenets of the International Council of Nursing's (ICN) Code of Ethics for Nurses and insights from relevant ethics and nursing ethics literature. The resulting framework facilitates evaluating potential consequences of a given CO for all involved. We propose that the framework can also serve as an aid for nurse educators as they prepare students for practice. Gaining clarity about the sense in which the concept of conscience provides a defensible foundation for objecting to legally, or otherwise ethically, permissible actions, in any given case is critical to arriving at an ethical and reasonable plan of action.
To participate or not to participate: The troublesome question of nurses' conscientious objection to abortion: A qualitative study

Valerie Fleming,Clare Maxwell,Claire Hanlon,Yvonne Robb,Joeri Vermeulen,Beata Dobrowolska

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.16258

IF: 3.057

2024-06-14

Journal of Advanced Nursing

Abstract:Aim To report a study investigating the implementation of the "conscience clause" by practising nurses in two National Health Service Hospital Trusts in the UK. Design A qualitative study. Methods Data were collected from 2018 to 2020 through qualitative face‐to‐face interviews with 20 nurses, transcribed verbatim and analyzed by thematic analysis. Results Major themes were developing conscience, negotiating conscience and parameters of participation. Conclusion Participants had varied views on conscientious objection, reflecting a continuum from unwillingness to be near anything related to abortion to being willing to participate in the whole process. Most participants framed involvement as fulfilling their "duty of care" to their patient. Direct experience of witnessing abortion overrode faith‐based foundations to shape participants' beliefs as objectors or non‐objectors. Non‐objectors were supportive of objecting colleagues. Implications for the Profession The complex nature of conscience as a fundamental human right is inherently related to the cultural and social context of nursing. "Employability" raised important questions over the real world of a nurse's legal right to invoke conscientious objection without consequences. Impact Problem addressed Conscientious objection to abortion continues to affect nursing. Main findings There was little knowledge of the law and a reluctance to make formal objections. Where and on whom will the research have an impact It highlights the need for delineated and implemented guidelines on conscientious objection in practice for nurses. Its findings, while local, may be applicable to other abortion services. Patient and Public Contribution Representatives of each were key in our advisory group. Reporting Method COREQ checklist for qualitative research.

nursing
Reproductive health and blurred professional boundaries

W Chavkin,V Breitbart

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/1049-3867(95)00078-X

IF: 3.053

Women s Health Issues

Abstract:We recognize that many of the issues raised are not simple. Our proposal calls for the same thoughtful deliberation applied in other settings to be brought to bear on reproductive health care. Some have already tried alternative approaches. In Albuquerque, New Mexico, a university hospital neonatologist and the district attorney have collaborated to create an alternative to sentencing program for women who are arrested for drug-related crimes and found to be both pregnant and drug addicted. Rather than proceed with criminal sanctions, these women are offered entry into a drug treatment program that is geared to families with young children and run by the pediatrics department. Here, the physician and the district attorney collaboratively responded in ways congruent with the professional integrity of each. In another example in Portland, Oregon, physicians, drug treatment providers, and child protective social service representatives cooperatively defeated a legislative proposal to mandatorily test and report pregnant women for illicit drug use and, instead, formed a task force to jointly develop state policy regarding the issue. Drug use, HIV infection, child abuse, and poverty are all cause for alarm. Yet it is critical that our frustration about these difficult problems not be translated into blaming individuals for "deviance," or into short-term inadequate responses. In developing policy we should consider the impact on the legal and ethical rights and obligations of both patient and physician. For every course, we should evaluate both immediate and long-term efficacy, the consequences for the doctor-patient relationship, and the consequences for medical integrity. In the midst of the present regulatory and fiscal turmoil affecting health care, we urge physicians to be careful and deliberate in the policies they embrace and the actions they take.
Assessing Public Reason Approaches to Conscientious Objection in Healthcare

Doug McConnell

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/s0963180124000112

2024-04-12

Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics

Abstract:Sometimes healthcare professionals conscientiously refuse to treat patients despite the patient requesting legal, medically indicated treatments within the professionals' remit. Recently, there has been a proliferation of views using the concept of public reason to specify which conscientious refusals of treatment should be accommodated. Four such views are critically assessed, namely, those of Robert Card, Massimo Reichlin, David Scott, and Doug McConnell. This paper argues that McConnell's view has advantages over the other approaches because it combines the requirement that healthcare professionals publicly justify the grounds of their conscientious refusals of treatment with the requirement that those grounds align with minimally decent healthcare. This relatively restrictive approach accommodates conscientious refusals from minimally decent healthcare professionals while still protecting good healthcare, the independence of the healthcare professions, and the fiduciary relationships.

social sciences, biomedical,health care sciences & services,health policy & services
Cornerstone medical ethics guidelines get a major update

Cathleen O'Grady

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adu2384

IF: 56.9

2024-11-01

Science

Abstract:Revised Declaration of Helsinki stresses need to avoid inequities and protect healthy trial volunteers

multidisciplinary sciences
Principlism and contemporary ethical considerations for providers of transgender health care

Luke R. Allen,Noah Adams,Florence Ashley,Cody Dodd,Diane Ehrensaft,Lin Fraser,Maurice Garcia,Simona Giordano,Jamison Green,Thomas Johnson,Justin Penny,Katherine Rachlin,Jaimie Veale

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/26895269.2024.2303462

2024-01-19

International Journal of Transgender Health

Abstract:Background: Transgender health care is a subject of much debate among clinicians, political commentators, and policy-makers. While the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) Standards of Care (SOC) establish clinical standards, these standards contain implied ethics but lack explicit focused discussion of ethical considerations in providing care. An ethics chapter in the SOC would enhance clinical guidelines. Aims: We aim to provide a valuable guide for healthcare professionals, and anyone interested in the ethical aspects of clinical support for gender diverse and transgender people of all ages. Recognizing that the WPATH is a global association, we address broad challenges. We offer a reflection on general ethical principles, providing conceptual tools for healthcare providers, patients, and families to navigate the specific challenges they might encounter in transgender health care, in line with WPATH’s worldwide mission and scope. Method: This article employs a descriptive analysis, and our framework of reference is the four principles of biomedical ethics: respect for autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice. Results: The article presents a discussion on the four ethical principles as applied to transgender health care. We address issues such as respect for patient autonomy in decision-making, the role of beneficence and nonmaleficence in clinical interventions, and the importance of justice in equitable treatment and access to care. Some of the ethical concerns we address in this article pertain to the current sociopolitical climate, where there has been increasing legal interference, internationally, for transgender and nonbinary people, particularly youth, seeking medical care. Discussion: We highlight the interplay between ethical principles and clinical practice, underscoring the need for ethical guidance in addressing the diverse challenges faced by healthcare providers and patients in transgender health care. We advocate for continuous refinement of ethical thinking to ensure that transgender health care is not only medically effective but also ethically sound.

public, environmental & occupational health,social sciences, biomedical, interdisciplinary,psychology, clinical
Understanding Conscientious Objection and the Acceptability of its Practice in Primary Care

Anne Williams

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/20502877.2022.2155099

Abstract:Ethically challenging or controversial medical procedures have prompted increasing requests for the exercise of conscientious objection, and caused concerns about how and when it should be practised. This paper clarifies definitions, especially with regard to discrimination, and explores the restrictions, duties, and practical limitations, in order to suggest criteria for its practice. It also argues that a conscientious refusal to treat, where there is therapeutic doubt, is a valid form of conscientious objection. An email survey sent to General Practitioners (GPs), explored the adherence to the suggested criteria, and assessed the outcomes, in terms of acceptability, impact, and difficulties experienced by the GPs, their colleagues and their patients. The results demonstrate high acceptability of conscientious objection, and better outcomes when the suggested criteria are adhered to. The GPs would support education to improve the practice of conscientious objection to a professional level, which could further improve outcomes and acceptability.
Doctors' rights to conscientiously object to refer patients to abortion service providers

Angela Ballantyne,Colin Gavaghan,Jeanne Snelling

2019-07-26

Abstract:After five decades of restrictive laws, New Zealand is on the cusp of law reform that may result in abortion being treated as a health, rather than a criminal, matter. Given this possible liberalisation, a pressing issue is the way in which 'conscientious objection' (CO) will be accommodated within the new legislative landscape. In this context, CO constitutes a health provider refusing, on the grounds of personal conscience, to provide care that, although legal and potentially clinically appropriate, conflicts with their personal moral views. Currently, New Zealand law permits significant concessions for conscientious objectors. This paper argues that in the light of current reform, the justification for permitting CO should be revisited. It claims that even if it is conceded that some form of CO should be respected, a pragmatic compromise must be adopted so that both provider's and women's rights are sufficiently protected. We argue that the current legal situation in New Zealand is unbalanced, favouring the rights of providers at the expense of women's timely access to abortion care. At a minimum, providers with a CO should be required to ensure an indirect referral to another provider who is willing to refer the woman to abortion services.
Health-care workforce implications of the Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization decision

Claire D Brindis,Melissa H Laitner,Ellen Wright Clayton,Susan C Scrimshaw,Barbara J Grosz,Lisa A Simpson,Sara Rosenbaum,Corale L Brierley,Melissa A Simon,Yvette Roubideaux,Bruce N Calonge,Paula A Johnson,Laura DeStefano,Ashley Bear,Kavita S Arora,Victor J Dzau

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(24)00581-6

2024-06-22

Abstract:The Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization Supreme Court decision, which revoked the constitutional right to abortion in the USA, has impacted the national medical workforce. Impacts vary across states, but providers in states with restrictive abortion laws now must contend with evolving legal and ethical challenges that have the potential to affect workforce safety, mental health, education, and training opportunities, in addition to having serious impacts on patient health and far-reaching societal consequences. Moreover, Dobbs has consequences on almost every facet of the medical workforce, including on physicians, nurses, pharmacists, and others who work within the health-care system. Comprehensive research is urgently needed to understand the wide-ranging implications of Dobbs on the medical workforce, including legal, ethical, clinical, and psychological dimensions, to inform evidence-based policies and standards of care in abortion-restrictive settings. Lessons from the USA might also have global relevance for countries facing similar restrictions on reproductive care.
SNMMI Clinical Trials Network Research Series for Technologists: Ethical Issues and Regulations in the Medical Workplace

Sarah Frye,Regan Butterfield,John M Hoffman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2967/jnmt.121.263100

Abstract:Ethical principles and laws have developed as medical practice and research have grown. This article discusses regulatory policies in patient care and the governing bodies that provide oversight. These include but are not limited to the Food and Drug Administration, Office for Human Research Protection, Code of Federal Regulations, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Joint Commission, Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, World Health Organization, and International Conference on Harmonization. This article reviews ethical requirements in clinical research and provides examples of medical mistreatment that forced the development of these rules and regulations. Some include the Nuremberg Code, Declaration of Helsinki, and Belmont Report; good clinical practice; and the Common Rule. Several specific research documents are discussed further in this continuing education series. These guiding documents and principles are important because every patient and research subject deserves a safe environment with safe products and protection of privacy. Individuals deserve to understand their role in medicine and clinical research, have the right to refuse care, make informed decisions, know the risks and benefits included, and ultimately have their individual choices respected.
Registered Nurses' personal rights vs. professional responsibility in caring for members of underserved and disenfranchised populations

Claire D Martino Maze

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2004.01107.x

Abstract:Aims: Health disparities exist and refer to the chasms in health status between the advantaged and disadvantaged. Intense multiculturalism will require different approaches and moral obligations to work with these groups and urgency exists to develop nursing caring strategies when dealing with these populations. Development of nursing curricula which identify prejudicial thinking and intolerance for marginalized groups will help to decrease fears and increase nurses' willingness to provide culturally competent health care for underserved and disenfranchised populations. Background: Caring for members of disenfranchised groups instills fear at some level in nurses who are working with these individuals. This fear may be due, in part, to the potential harm nurses perceive the patient may cause them, or perhaps it is because they feel they could possibly be in the individual's situation at some point in their lives. Prejudice and discrimination continue to exist in society and have adversely affected the health care system and the nursing profession. Discrimination may be based on differences due to age, ability, gender, race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, or any characteristics by which people differ. Relevance to clinical practice: Registered Nurses are accountable for nursing decisions and actions regardless of personal preferences. Due to the rapidly changing healthcare system the nurse faces increasing ethical dilemmas and human rights issues. Nurses are individually accountable for caring for each patient and the right to refuse an assignment should be carefully interpreted to avoid patient abandonment. Nurses' objections can be based on moral, ethical, or religious beliefs not on personal preferences and in an emergency the nurse must provide treatment regardless of any personal objections.
Review of the Latest Revision of Common Rule in the United States

Hai-hong ZHANG,Ya-li CONG

DOI: https://doi.org/10.12014/j.issn.1002-0772.2017.11a.03

2017-01-01

Abstract:Common Rule,as the most important regulatory framework for human subject protection in the United States,initiated its first massive update since 2009.The Final Rule came out in January 2017 after the release of ANPRM and NPRM for public comments in 2011 and 2015 respectively.The Final Rule adopted new provisions and requirements on informed consent process,broad consent,single IRB review of cooperative research,exemption categories and continuing review.This article began with the background analysis of Common Rule updating,introduced the revision process and main updates adopted in the Final Rule.Interpretation and comments were elaborated for the discussion of both positive impacts and remaining challenges.To sum up,it is important for us to learn and bring in international experiences of human subject protection into Chinese contest in a timely manner,as well as more creative problem-oriented research exploration and policy innovation in the future.
The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA): its broad effect on practice

Andrew D Feld

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1572-0241.2005.50621.x

Abstract:The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), and its final rule, raised fears among practitioners of new and complex regulations that might interfere with medical practice, lead to inadvertent liability and unwanted expense. It generated a dizzying set of health-care administrative activities and a new work for legal consultants. It has extensive scope, and includes most health plans and practitioners. It has regulated both privacy and security, including electronic, paper, and oral communications. However, after a HIPAA compliant office structure is established, and the privacy notice is reviewed and signed by the patient, disclosure of medical information for treatment, payment or "health-care operations" is permitted without recurrent consent forms, thus allowing substantially familiar patterns of doctor-to-doctor communication about treatment. Further, the initial approach to enforcement appears to some legal observers to be more likely corrective rather than punitive, although providers remain uneasy over the mere possibility of criminal penalties. As regards medical research, uncertainties about the application of HIPAA seem less resolved and more variably interpreted by different institutions, with ongoing fear in the research community that important public health and epidemiologic research activity may be compromised by well meaning IRBs using inconsistent, overly strict or erroneous interpretation of the intent of HIPAA regulations.
Essay: The Limits of Conscience: Moral Clashes over Deeply Divisive Healthcare Procedures

Robin Fretwell Wilson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/009885880803400102

2008-03-01

Abstract:Refusals by individual pharmacies and pharmacists to fill prescriptions for emergency contraceptives (“EC”) have dominated news headlines, from the Washington Post to the Miami Herald. In the act that sparked a firestorm of controversy, an Eckerd pharmacist refused to fill a rape victim’s prescription for Plan B. A few months later, 11 Alabama nurses resigned positions at state clinics rather than provide EC against their moral convictions. These refusals do not seem to be driven by moral concerns about promiscuity, since pharmacists have refused to dispense Plan B to married couples as well. Instead, the refusals reflect moral and religious concerns about facilitating an act that would cut-off a potential human life.

law
Ethical Dilemmas in Human Rights Field Education: A Case Study on Macro Practice in a Reproductive-Rights Policy Setting

Heather Witt,Karyn Levin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41134-020-00142-0

2020-11-27

Journal of Human Rights and Social Work

Abstract:AbstractIn the article that follows, the two authors, a professor/field supervisor and a social work student intern in a conservative western state in the USA, discuss a values-based ethical dilemma in field-based social work education. While having to choose between particular values or perspectives in social work practice is relatively common—perhaps even part of the unique expertise we bring as social workers—the dilemmas faced by social work students in their field placements present particular challenges for the students, their field supervisors, and their instructors. The authors present a case study regarding birth control legislation that highlights those challenges—where an ideal solution for helping a particular population must be weighed with a marginally better but incomplete solution. Ultimately, this case and the authors’ reflection on it suggest the need for ethical training articulated by Gray and Gibbons (2007) that recognizes the limitations of ethical frameworks and the “Kantian and utilitarian ethics that [have] been taken to extremes” and dogmatized in some corners of the social work field (p. 234). Instead, the authors argue in favor of a broader, more flexible ethical training that includes virtue ethics and a focus on human rights. Further, case studies in courses need to include policy practice dilemmas, as these often challenge the dogmatic ethical frameworks that are often ill equipped to inform effective decision making under stressful circumstances.

HHS Issues Revised Health Worker Conscience Rule

Freedom of Conscience in Health Care: Distinctions and Limits

Conscience, Disobedience, and Standard of Care

Complying with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. Privacy standards

Harmonizing conscience claims and patient access to assisted death

Conscientious Objection to Providing Gender Health Care in Pediatric Training: Balancing the Vulnerability of Transgender Youth and the Vulnerability of Pediatric Residents

Professional responsibility, nurses, and conscientious objection: A framework for ethical evaluation

To participate or not to participate: The troublesome question of nurses' conscientious objection to abortion: A qualitative study

Reproductive health and blurred professional boundaries

Assessing Public Reason Approaches to Conscientious Objection in Healthcare

Cornerstone medical ethics guidelines get a major update

Principlism and contemporary ethical considerations for providers of transgender health care

Understanding Conscientious Objection and the Acceptability of its Practice in Primary Care

Doctors' rights to conscientiously object to refer patients to abortion service providers

Health-care workforce implications of the Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization decision

SNMMI Clinical Trials Network Research Series for Technologists: Ethical Issues and Regulations in the Medical Workplace

Registered Nurses' personal rights vs. professional responsibility in caring for members of underserved and disenfranchised populations

Review of the Latest Revision of Common Rule in the United States

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA): its broad effect on practice

Essay: The Limits of Conscience: Moral Clashes over Deeply Divisive Healthcare Procedures

Ethical Dilemmas in Human Rights Field Education: A Case Study on Macro Practice in a Reproductive-Rights Policy Setting