Clinical Ethics 12 (3):117-123 (2017)

BackgroundSwedish healthcare providers are supposed to be value-neutral when making clinical decisions. Recent conducted studies among Swedish physicians have indicated that the proportion of those whose personal values influence decision-making vary depending on the framing and the nature of the issue.ObjectiveTo examine whether the proportions of value-influenced and value-neutral participants vary depending on the extent to which the intervention is considered controversial.MethodsTo discriminate between value-neutral and value-influenced healthcare providers, we have used the same methods in six vignette based studies including 10 more or less controversial interventions. To be controversial was understood as being an intervention where conscientious objections in healthcare have been proposed or an intervention that is against law and regulations.ResultsEnd of life decisions and female reproduction issues are associated with conscientious objection and more or less against regu...
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1177/1477750917704157
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 69,959
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

View all 10 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Freedom Vs. Intervention: Six Tough Cases.Daniel E. Lee - 2005 - Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.


Added to PP index

Total views
13 ( #768,593 of 2,504,602 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #416,529 of 2,504,602 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes