s
may also be acting on their beliefs. It is normal for people to act on
their beliefs, at the workplace or elsewhere.
A) Beliefs -and believers -
can be religious or non-religious. For example: people may believe in
the equality of all people for religious reasons, for for political,
ideological, or philosophical reasons. If one can reasonably act on a
non-religious belief, one can reasonably act on a religious belief.
There is no reason - apart from anti-religious bigotry - to prevent people
from acting on religious beliefs. [See
There are No Secular Unbelievers.]
A) That depends upon the wording of the law. A
statute can be drafted broadly so that it can be applied to any kind of
medical procedure. On the other hand, it can be written to include a class
of procedures (all those affecting life, for example). Finally, a law can
also identify specific procedures to which it is to apply. The Project website
includes examples of different kinds of legislative drafting.
A) Sometimes a law is drafted to respond to a
particular need or concern. For example: many American laws were drawn up in
direct response to the legalization of abortion by a U.S. Supreme Court
ruling about abortion. Hence, many of these laws concern only abortion.
Similarly, concerns with a certain class of
procedures (cloning and in vitro fertilization, euthanasia and assisted
suicide) may generate a law that has narrower application.
The broadest approach, which does not restrict protection
to specific procedures or classes of services, may result from a political
and social ethos that is respectful of freedom of conscience in principle.
It may also reflect an awareness that laws that are procedure-specific are
not sufficiently flexible to keep pace with changes in medical technology.
Finally, laws may be influenced by pragmatic
judgement about the political support likely to be available for different
kinds of legislation.
A) No. PCLs prevent people from being forced
to participate in medical procedures, but they do not make them illegal.
A) No. Many states provide alternatives to
active military service for conscientious objectors, but such policies have
never been understood to mean that military service is immoral. Similarly, a
protection of conscience law need have no impact on the dominant moral
outlook concerning procedures to which some people object.
A) Unfortunately, their record in this respect
indicates that they are unreliable. (See
Repression of Conscience). Moreover, many people are not members of
unions or professional associations.
A) Yes. But, in the first place, many workers
are not protected by collective agreements. More important, freedom of
conscience is not merely an employee benefit. It should be considered an
employee right, protected by legislation, lest unions actually bargain it
away in exchange for more vacation pay, for example, or higher overtime
A) They could result in some prosecutions at
first. But they should prevent litigation and prosecution by
discouraging coercive conduct. If problems arise, they are more likely to be
settled without going to court if people can refer to a single law. And
there should be fewer problems as time goes on and people learn their
A) This could only occur if large numbers of health
care workers refused to participate. In that case, it would be
appropriate to re-examine the nature of the procedure. A re-examination
might suggest, for example, that the procedure should be done only by
medical specialists, or only in certain facilities, or by specialists
outside traditional health care professions.
In fact, it is extremely unlikely that large numbers
of health care workers would refuse to participate in morally
non-controversial procedures that are actually beneficial for the patient.
That has not occurred in jurisdictions like the state of Illinois, U.S.A.,
which has a broadly worded protection of conscience statute. [See the
Health Care Right of Conscience Act.]
A) There are many medical services that
cannot, for economic reasons, be routinely provided in rural areas, and even
in small tow