• Anibal Faúndes, Graciana Alves Duarte, and Maria José Duarte Osis.
• FIGO Working Group for the Prevention of Unsafe Abortion, London, UK; Center for Research on Human Reproduction of Campinas, Campinas, Brazil. Electronic address: afaundes@uol.com.br.
• Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2013 Dec 1; 123 Suppl 3: S57-9.

AbstractConscientious objection is a legitimate right of physicians to reject the practice of actions that violate their ethical or moral principles. The application of that principle is being used in many countries as a justification to deny safe abortion care to women who have the legal right to have access to safe termination of pregnancy. The problem is that, often, this concept is abused by physicians who camouflage under the guise of conscientious objection their fear of experiencing discrimination and social stigma if they perform legal abortions. These colleagues seem to ignore the ethical principle that the primary conscientious duty of OB/GYNs is-at all times-to treat, or provide benefit and prevent harm to, the patients for whose care they are responsible. Any conscientious objection to treating a patient is secondary to this primary duty. One of the jobs of the FIGO Working Group for the Prevention of Unsafe Abortion is to change this paradigm and make our colleagues proud of providing legal abortion services that protect women's life and health, and concerned about disrespecting the human rights of women and professional ethical principles. Copyright © 2013 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

23 keywords...

hide…