Question

Mary and her staff are all members serving on an ethics committee at an academic teaching hospital with no religious affiliations or sponsors.

Mary's hospital permits the performing of abortions by physicians in the first trimester or in later trimesters if the health of the mother is at stake. The costs associated with abortions are paid either by the patient out-of-pocket or by the patient's private insurance. (It is federal law that there are no federally funded abortions, for example, through Medicaid).

There has been a great deal of tension among providers in the OB/GYN department lately. Dr. Henderson is a physician recently hired to work in that department. Last week, he refused to perform an elective first-trimester abortion based on his religious beliefs. Dr. Hinkley, another physician in the OB/GYN department, was willing and able to step in and provide the patient with the requested service, but he is concerned because Dr. Henderson has stated that he will refuse to perform a termination in the event of an emergency as well. Given that Dr. Henderson is sometimes the only on-call ob-gyn available, this could potentially mean that a case would occur where the patient did not receive the life-saving care.

The ethics committee is an advisory body in the hospital—the institution looks to it to provide guidance on what the ethics policies and stances of the organization should be and to manage ethical conflicts, but ultimately it is only advisory. It does not have authority to enforce any policy it recommends. The committee has been consulted about how this conflict should be addressed by the CEO. The CEO recognizes this is a problem that cannot be easily resolved and has never occurred before. She is not aware of any relevant policies in the organization. As members of the committee, Mary is meeting to discuss what her actions and recommendations should be, prior to having to meet with the CEO later in the week. What would Mary's recommendation be and why?

Compose a draft addressing the issues brief that considers the following:

• Should Dr. Henderson have to provide the elective termination? What about the emergency termination? Why or why not?
• What role do the pluralistic perspectives on the moral status of the embryo play in this ethical quandary?
• What are the implications for physicians, nurses, medical students, and residents that provide clinical care; the institution; and patients if Dr. Henderson's exercise of conscience is respected? If it is not?

Answer 1

Mary's s recommendation may be, Henderson want to attend abortions. Because if in case of emergency, then no any other staffs means, the patient life become threatening. Mary can advice Henderson, not able for force.

Dr, Henderson sholud try to attend emergency surgery. Because that will not be preplanned. So in absence of other doctors, if Dr. Henderson also not attending emergency termination, then life of patient become threatening. In case of elective abortion it sholud be already planned. So hospital can arrange other doctors for that earlier.

Embryo have the right for getting birth in the world. In case of pluralistic principles, the killing of embryo is not Wright. That not have moral value. Dr. Henderson believe on moral principles, so that only he tries to avoid like that situations.

If Dr. Henderson's conscience respected other health team members, hospitals etc will stop practicing of abortions, or they will not force Dr. Handerson to conduct abortions. If it is not respected, then whole health team become oppose Dr. Handerson or they will force him to do like that procedures.