Conscientious Objection on the Socio-Political Background of Ethical
Relativism
THE FUTURE OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY: The Fundamental Right To
Practice and be Trained According to Conscience: An International Meeting
of Catholic Obstetricians and Gynaecologist
Organised by the World Federation of Catholic Medical Associations
(FIAMC) and by MaterCare International
(MCI)
Sponsored by the Pontifical Council for the Health Pastoral Care ROME, June
17th-20th, 2001
Reproduced with permission
Nikolaus Zwicky-Aeberhard
*
As we all know very well it becomes increasingly
difficult for a junior doctor to get an appropriate
postgraduate training in obstetrics and gynaecology
if he refuses to assist to or perform abortions and
almost impossible if he refuses to participate in
contraceptive measures, in vitro fertilisation IVF (
and similar reproductive procedures) and
sterilisation. Even in Poland where the conscience
clause is generally accepted for abortion the
situation becomes very difficult when participation
in contraception is refused.
Apart from strictly moral aspects which forbid
per se the use of contraceptives and of IVF etc. we
have to consider the fact, that both contraception
and IVF are accompanied by very early abortions and
so-called embryo-loss respectively. Therefore it is
absolutely essential that the conscience clause is
also respected here. And we have to fight for it.
Our claim therefore is not less than this: Regarding
abortion, contraception, IVF etc. and sterilisation
operations we demand the right of conscientious
objection without undergoing handicaps or even
impossibility of postgraduate studies or
professional work. The stipulation must not only
cover the right of free decision but include also
the prevention of possibly resulting disadvantages.
Taking into account the
UNO-Human-Rights-Declaration and considering the
granted rights and freedoms in the constitutions of
most countries, how may it be possible, that the
training of gynaecologists becomes a problem, if
they refuse to terminate pregnancies etc.? According
to the Human-Rights-Declaration of dec. 10th 1948
"every human being has the granted right to freedom
of thinking, conscience and religion and the right
for work, free choice of profession and suitable
working conditions."
The Swiss Constitution declares among others:
- Art.7 The dignity of man is
to be respected and protected.
- Art.8.2 No human person must be discriminated -
especially not for his religion, his world view or
political opinion.
- Art.10. Every human being has the right to live.
- Art 15.1 Religious freedom and freedom of
conscience are granted.
Similar formulations are found in the constitutions
of most countries. Considering the quoted statements
it should be possilbe to accomplish our message
especially:
- If every human being has the right to live (Swiss
constitution Art. 10.1) it has this right even if
not yet born, that means from conception.
- If every human being has the claim to free
thinking and freedom of conscience
(UNO-Human-Rights-Declaration Art. 18 and Swiss
constitution Art. 15.1), he has also the right of
conscientious objection.
- If every human being has the right to work, free
choice of profession and satisfying working
condition(Human-Rights-Decl.) and because of his
world view (Swiss Const. 8.2) may not be
discriminated.
It is difficult to understand, why someone cannot
complete his training or practice his profession in
a normal way, if he exerts his right of
conscientious objection. In fact the doctor not
willing to terminate pregnancies deliberately
protects exactly the human life to which the
government commits itself in its constitution. So
how can a government by an order of service force a
hospital to do abortions or refuse to employ doctors
unwillingly to terminate pregnancies?
Here it is worthwhile to remember Cicero (106 -
43 B.C) and his controversial opinions against
ethical relativism in his book De Legibus.
"Nature brought forth general
understandings for us and planted them in our souls
in such a way that we can distinguish good from
evil. To conclude that this is based on a mere
opinion and not regards the natural circumstances is
entirely absurd" (free translation of the latin
text: Nam ita communis intellegentias nobis
natura efficit easque in animis nostris inchoavit,
ut honestia in virtute ponantur, in vitiis turpia.
Ea autem in opinione existimare, non in natura
posita dementis est.).
With this last statement Cicero clearly rejects
the nowadays much praised Consent-Ethics. Less
abstract is the comment of the Holy Father John Paul
II in his Encyclical Evangelium Vitae:
" Ethical relativism must be
considered as a great danger to the peaceful
co-existance and cannot be justified with the
institution of democracy depends on the values which
it is representing and promoting. The basis of these
values are no temporary or changing majorities of
opinions, but the recognition of an objective law of
ethics (EV 70)".
Regarding our objective the Pope continues:
"Whoever becomes conscientious objector must not
only be protected from punishments but also from any
legal, disciplinary, economic and professional harm
(EV 74)." Our claim that Evangelium Vitae compatible gynaecologists must not be impeded in
their studies and professional work is therefore
legitimate and justified in details in the mentioned
documents. I refer to a question of an Italian
lawyer: " Come si potrebbe perdere il posto
esercitando un proprio diritto?" The
disadvantages against doctors who work in conformity
with the Magisterium would also be an injustice
towards women and families who prefer to be treated
by such doctors. Such women and families are
numerous.
The respect of human life from the moment of
fertilisation and the increasing threat to unborn
human life which can be eliminated be order of
service is the basis of my communication. Because of
the increasing institutionalisation of abortions
politicians and government officials try in many
countries, especially in West, Central and Eastern
Europe (except Poland) to keep inconvenient
gynaecologists away from postgraduate studies and
professional work. If this development continues and
if the intolerance against Magisterium-minded
gynaecologists extends to other countries the
disappearance of such professionals can be foretold.
However I think that this trend will be slowed down
not only because of the dangerous
population-implosion throughout Europe but also
because of a slowly emerging change of opinions. It
seems that in England and France an increasing
number of young gynaecologists is refusing abortion
--- not necessarily for ethical reasons but just
because they are upset.
What to do? It is exceedingly important that the
claim of conscientious objection including the
prevention of disadvantages is recognised and
propagated. Catholic Medical Associations have to
intensify contacts to lawyers and politicians on a
national and international level regarding this
topic. We have to remain vigilant regarding the
activities of organisations as IPPF and others of
that kind and we have to inform politicians and warn
them.
Finishing this communication I recommend our
thinking and our work to the intercession of the
Blessed Gianna Beretta Molla.