Reply to: Beyond Money: Conscientious Objection in Medicine as a Conflict of Interests

Michal Pruski*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalLetterpeer-review

Abstract

Giubilini and Savulescu in their recent Journal of Bioethical Inquiry symposium article presented an account of conscientious objection that argues for its recognition as a non-financial conflict of interest. In this short commentary, I highlight some problems with their account. First, I discuss their solicitor analogy. Second, I discuss some problems surrounding their objectivity claim about standards of medical care. Next, I discuss some issues arising from consistently applying their approach. Finally, I highlight that conscientious objection should be viewed not as a conflict of interest but as something that society has an interest in preserving. I conclude by arguing that clinicians who have a conscientious objection can be treated in the same way as those who decide to subspecialize and do not need to give up work in their specialty. While Giubilini and Savulescu present an interesting argument about conscientious objection, theirs is not a compelling view. Indeed, the way we approach conscientious objection has more to teach us about conflicts of interest than the other way around.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)177-180
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of Bioethical Inquiry
Volume18
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Mar 2021

Keywords

  • Conflicts of interests
  • Conscience
  • Conscientious objection
  • Professionalism

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Reply to: Beyond Money: Conscientious Objection in Medicine as a Conflict of Interests'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this