Conscientious objection: a global health perspective.

IF 7.1 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Karel-Bart Celie, Xavier Symons, Makayla Kochheiser, Ruben Ayala, Kokila Lakhoo
{"title":"Conscientious objection: a global health perspective.","authors":"Karel-Bart Celie, Xavier Symons, Makayla Kochheiser, Ruben Ayala, Kokila Lakhoo","doi":"10.1136/bmjgh-2024-017555","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":9137,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Global Health","volume":"9 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11683958/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Global Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2024-017555","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

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.

良心拒服兵役:全球健康视角。
拒服兵役是一个从全球健康角度很少讨论的关键话题,尽管它与我们固有的多样化领域有特殊的相关性。在这篇分析论文中,我们认为,在全球卫生背景下,全面禁止特定类型的非歧视性良心拒服兵役是不合理的。我们首先介绍了基于道德心理学的对良心的细致入微的描述,并概述了歧视性和非歧视性的反对形式。接下来,我们指出经常被忽视但无处不在的道德不确定性,这需要认识上的谦卑——也就是说,一种承认自己可能出错的态度。我们建立了两个关于道德不确定性的论点。首先,如果在处理理论上的价值观时认识上的谦卑是必要的(就像生物伦理学中的共识一样),那么当这些价值观应用于现实世界时,它将更加必要。第二,全球卫生摆脱了过去的殖民统治,需要对道德帝国主义有特别的认识并加以抵制。因此,对分歧采取绝对主义态度与全球卫生减少不平等和摆脱殖民主义的双重目标是不相容的。事实上,全球生物伦理学(平衡对多样性的尊重与集体道德进步的目标)的可能性取决于在面对不可避免的分歧时适当地承认道德的不确定性。这与全面禁止出于良心拒服兵役是不相容的。作为最后一个简短的说明,我们将良心反对与公平获得护理的问题区分开来。我们注意到,将两者混为一谈实际上可能导致整体上不太公平的情况。最后,我们建议对诸如《世界生物伦理与人权宣言》之类的国际共识文件进行修订,以包括关于良心拒服兵役的细致入微的指导方针,这些指导方针可以作为区域和国家决策机构的模板。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMJ Global Health
BMJ Global Health Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
11.40
自引率
4.90%
发文量
429
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊介绍: BMJ Global Health is an online Open Access journal from BMJ that focuses on publishing high-quality peer-reviewed content pertinent to individuals engaged in global health, including policy makers, funders, researchers, clinicians, and frontline healthcare workers. The journal encompasses all facets of global health, with a special emphasis on submissions addressing underfunded areas such as non-communicable diseases (NCDs). It welcomes research across all study phases and designs, from study protocols to phase I trials to meta-analyses, including small or specialized studies. The journal also encourages opinionated discussions on controversial topics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信