Reasons and Refusals

International Journal of Applied Philosophy 26 (1):105-118 (2012)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Health-care professionals sometimes appeal to their own consciences in order to justify their exemption from professional duties. I argue that we can only understand the content of a conscientious refusal as either a claim about the psychological dispositions of the refusing professional or as a purely normative claim about the status of the action that is the object of the refusal. If we adopt the former view, we would still need to adjudicate these refusals in terms of the acceptability of the moral views that ground them. If the latter, then we effectively abandon the conception of conscientious refusals that is most widely discussed in the philosophical literature. Whichever option we choose, we must conclude that there is no reason to allow for traditionally understood conscientious refusals by health-care professionals.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Reasons and Refusals.Patrick Clipsham - 2012 - International Journal of Applied Philosophy 26 (1):105-118.
Comparing Policies on Conscientious Refusals: A Feminist Perspective.Patrick Clipsham - 2013 - International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 6 (1):159-165.
Conscientious Refusal and Access to Abortion and Contraception.Chloe Fitzgerald & Carolyn McLeod - 2015 - In John Arras, Elizabeth Fenton & Rebecca Kukla (eds.), Routledge Companion to Bioethics. New York: Routledge. pp. 343-356.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-02-16

Downloads
14 (#965,243)

6 months
6 (#504,917)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Patrick Clipsham
Winona State University

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references