Main content
Course: Wireless Philosophy > Unit 6
Lesson 4: Healthcare relationships: Should providers have the right of conscientious objection?Evaluating the argument
Should Healthcare Providers Have the Right of Conscientious Objection?
Evaluate and discuss the argument presented in this video.
Here's a hypothetical scenario:
Carl, an orthopedic surgeon in the local hospital of a thinly-populated area, has recently decided that he will never again prescribe opioids for his patients’ postoperative pain. He’s simply witnessed and heard about too many heartbreaking, infuriating cases of patients ending up with life-destroying addictions after being prescribed opioids for pain. Instead he’s started relying exclusively on—perhaps less effective, but certainly less addictive—non-opioid medications to manage his patients’ postoperative pain.
The few surgical patients he’s had since making this decision were willing to stick to non-opioid pain medications, and it worked well for them all. Carl’s current patient, however, needs a surgery that tends to have a rather painful recovery period, and the patient insists that Carl give him opioids. Although this request meets the standards of care for such surgical recoveries, Carl refuses—despite knowing that he’s the only surgeon within 300 miles who can perform this operation reliably well.
As Carl’s colleagues join the patient’s side of the debate, Carl finally declares that this is a matter of conscientious objection. He finds it morally despicable to get a patient started on opioids, and so he absolutely refuses to perform any surgery unless the patient first contractually agrees not to use opioids for the pain.
Should Carl have the right to conscientiously object to this and any future surgery until the no-opioid contract is signed?
Consider the following range of opinions on this question:
- Carl should have the right of conscientious objection. People can denounce and dislike him all they want, but he should not be compelled to violate his deep moral convictions on this issue. Although Carl should generally have the right to conscientiously object on this issue, this right should not extend to cases where the patient truly has no adequate alternatives for getting the care that they need.
- Carl should be compelled to perform the surgery. If he still refuses, he should be subject to serious lawsuits by the patient and perhaps the hospital, but this shouldn’t include taking away his medical license.
- Carl should be compelled to perform the surgery. If he still refuses, he should be fired from his job and lose his medical license.
Now, take some time - by yourself or with others - to reflect openly yet critically on this issue. Where do you stand, and why?