Conscientious objection: a global health perspective
Abstract: Conscientious objection is a critical topic that has been sparsely discussed from a global health perspective, despite its special relevance to our inherently diverse field. In this Analysis paper, we argue that blanket prohibitions of a specific type of non-discriminatory conscientious objection are unjustified in the global health context. We begin both by introducing a nuanced account of conscience that is grounded in moral psychology and by providing an overview of discriminatory and non-discriminatory forms of objection. Next, we point to the frequently neglected but ubiquitous presence of moral uncertainty, which entails a need for epistemic humility—that is, an attitude that acknowledges the possibility one might be wrong. We build two arguments on moral uncertainty. First, if epistemic humility is necessary when dealing with values in theory (as appears to be the consensus in bioethics), then it will be even more necessary when these values are applied in the real world. Second, the emergence of global health from its colonial past requires special awareness of, and resistance to, moral imperialism. Absolutist attitudes towards disagreement are thus incompatible with global health’s dual aims of reducing inequity and emerging from colonialism. Indeed, the possibility of global bioethics (which balances respect for plurality with the goal of collective moral progress) hinges on appropriately acknowledging moral uncertainty when faced with inevitable disagreement. This is incompatible with blanket prohibitions of conscientious objection. As a brief final note, we distinguish conscientious objection from the problem of equitable access to care. We note that conflating the two may actually lead to a less equitable picture on the whole. We conclude by recommending that international consensus documents, such as the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights, be amended to include nuanced guidelines regarding conscientious objection that can then be used as a template by regional and national policymaking bodies.
The importance of global bioethics to pediatric health care.
Abstract: The paradigm of values adopted by the global health community has a palpable, albeit often unseen, impact on patient health care. In this Viewpoint, we investigate an inherent tension in the core values of medical ethics and clinical practice that could explain why paediatric health care faces resource constraints despite compelling economic and societal imperatives to prioritise child health and wellbeing. The dominant narrative in the philosophy of medicine tends to disproportionately underscore values of independence and self-determination, which becomes problematic in the context of paediatric patients, who by their very nature epitomise vulnerability and dependence. A double-jeopardy situation arises when disadvantaged children see their inherent dependence leveraged against them. We illustrate this predicament through specific examples relating to rights and obligations and to autonomy. Alternative value perspectives— communitarianism and relational autonomy—might offer more robust protection for vulnerable children. A shift away from the dominant narrative towards a more explicit and inclusive discussion of values is necessary. Such a shift requires giving a legitimate platform to diverse perspectives, with the presumption that collective moral progress is possible; this endeavour is embodied by global bioethics. Successful implementation of global bioethics, in turn, hinges on close collaboration between practicing clinicians and bioethicists. Taking global bioethics seriously and actively pursuing collaboration could help the global health community achieve more equitable health care.