澳大利亚的良心反对:堕胎与自愿协助死亡的比较。

IF 0.6 Q2 LAW
Journal of Law and Medicine Pub Date : 2022-12-01
Ronli Sifris
{"title":"澳大利亚的良心反对:堕胎与自愿协助死亡的比较。","authors":"Ronli Sifris","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Abortion and voluntary assisted dying (VAD) are areas of health care that elicit passionate and emotional responses. As a result of the diverse perspectives relating to these forms of medical care, Australian law allows for conscientious objection in both contexts. This article considers the role of conscientious objection in health care in Australia, with a particular focus on abortion and VAD. In begins by considering the legal position, highlighting some of the key differences in the way that conscientious objection is regulated in these two contexts and between Australian jurisdictions. It observes that jurisdictions which have legalised both abortion and VAD have not necessarily adopted the same approach to the question of conscientious objection as it pertains to abortion versus VAD. The article then turns to consider the reality of conscientious objection \"on the ground\" across these two domains in an effort to understand this distinction.</p>","PeriodicalId":45522,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law and Medicine","volume":"29 4","pages":"1079-1089"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Conscientious Objection in Australia: A Comparison between Abortion and Voluntary Assisted Dying.\",\"authors\":\"Ronli Sifris\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Abortion and voluntary assisted dying (VAD) are areas of health care that elicit passionate and emotional responses. As a result of the diverse perspectives relating to these forms of medical care, Australian law allows for conscientious objection in both contexts. This article considers the role of conscientious objection in health care in Australia, with a particular focus on abortion and VAD. In begins by considering the legal position, highlighting some of the key differences in the way that conscientious objection is regulated in these two contexts and between Australian jurisdictions. It observes that jurisdictions which have legalised both abortion and VAD have not necessarily adopted the same approach to the question of conscientious objection as it pertains to abortion versus VAD. The article then turns to consider the reality of conscientious objection \\\"on the ground\\\" across these two domains in an effort to understand this distinction.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45522,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Law and Medicine\",\"volume\":\"29 4\",\"pages\":\"1079-1089\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Law and Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Law and Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

堕胎和自愿协助死亡(VAD)是卫生保健领域,引发热情和情绪反应。由于对这些形式的医疗保健有不同的看法,澳大利亚法律允许在这两种情况下出于良心拒服兵役。本文考虑了良心反对在澳大利亚医疗保健中的作用,特别关注堕胎和VAD。首先考虑法律立场,强调在这两种情况下以及在澳大利亚司法管辖区之间规范良心拒服兵役方式的一些关键差异。委员会注意到,将堕胎和自愿堕胎合法化的司法管辖区对出于良心拒服兵役的问题不一定采取与堕胎和自愿堕胎相同的处理办法。然后,文章转而考虑这两个领域“在地面上”良心反对的现实,以努力理解这种区别。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Conscientious Objection in Australia: A Comparison between Abortion and Voluntary Assisted Dying.

Abortion and voluntary assisted dying (VAD) are areas of health care that elicit passionate and emotional responses. As a result of the diverse perspectives relating to these forms of medical care, Australian law allows for conscientious objection in both contexts. This article considers the role of conscientious objection in health care in Australia, with a particular focus on abortion and VAD. In begins by considering the legal position, highlighting some of the key differences in the way that conscientious objection is regulated in these two contexts and between Australian jurisdictions. It observes that jurisdictions which have legalised both abortion and VAD have not necessarily adopted the same approach to the question of conscientious objection as it pertains to abortion versus VAD. The article then turns to consider the reality of conscientious objection "on the ground" across these two domains in an effort to understand this distinction.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
63
×
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