Submission to the Canadian Medical Association Re: 2018 Revision of the CMA Code of Ethics
Full Text
VI. In the CMA's words: a policy on physician freedom of conscience
Introduction
VI.1 Since 1970, the CMA's Code of Ethics has taken a general approach,
leaving detailed discussion of particular issues to CMA policy statements.
The 2018 Revision includes more explanatory material than has been customary,
and significantly develops some statements made in the 2004 version (such as
sections concerning privacy/confidentiality and responsibilities to oneself).
VI.2 The model proposed here is consistent with the approach taken in the 2018
Revision and its predecessors. 2018 Revision C3 remains a general statement, and a
supplementary policy statement drawn from CMA sources provides more detailed
guidance.
VI.3 The 2018 Revision C3 and supplementary
policy proposed below are comprised almost entirely of verbatim or only slightly
modified passages from important CMA position statements, as can
be seen from the colour coding of the text. Virtually
everything here has already been approved by the CMA.
VI.4 What is
proposed here is limited to what is known to be acceptable to the
CMA, and presented almost entirely in the CMA's words. A more
comprehensive policy drawn from CMA and CMPA sources ("CMA Plus") is
provided in Part VII.
VI.5 The exercise of freedom of conscience is presumed to occur
within the ethical framework reflected in other parts of the
Code, such as the fundamental commitments discussed in
2018 Revision Section B.
Sources
CMA Code of Ethics (2018)
C3. Give
patients timely notice of deeply held beliefs or values that may
influence the recommendation, provision or practice of any
medical procedure or intervention that the patient needs or
requests. You are not obligated to
fulfil a patient's request for procedures/interventions to which
you object for reasons of conscience, nor to participate in
providing them by referral to a provider. However, you must respond to requests by
providing patients with complete information on all treatment
options available, including the procedure/intervention to which
you object, and advise them how to access a provincial or
regional health care network or equivalent to obtain further
information, referral or services. Upon the request of the
patient, you must transfer patient records to a physician or
institution identified by the patient, while continuing to
provide other aspects of care, or transfer the care of the
patient to a physician or institution identified by the patient,
continuing other aspects of care until the transfer has been
effected. You must not impede or block
access to procedures/interventions to which you object, and you
must not make acceptance or retention of patients conditional
upon their agreement not to request such
procedures/interventions.
Supplementary Guidelines
Physicians' ethical norms and duties, arising from long-standing
traditions that entail moral commitments to preserve and protect
life, have not changed. The practice of medicine is an
inescapably moral enterprise, and physicians exercise moral agency
in making every treatment decision, whether or not they advert to
the fact.
It is in fact in a patient's best
interests and in the public interest for physicians to act as moral
agents, and not as technicians or service providers devoid of moral
judgement. At a time when some feel that we are seeing increasingly
problematic behaviours, and what some view as a crisis in
professionalism, we ought to be
articulating obligations that encourage moral agency, instead of
imposing a duty that is essentially punitive to those for whom it is
intended and renders an impoverished understanding of conscience.
Hence, the CMA supports the right of all physicians
to follow their conscience when deciding whether or not to provide or
otherwise participate in procedures or interventions requested by
patients.
Foundational considerations
Respect for freedom of conscience:
The CMA believes that
physicians must be able to follow their conscience without
discrimination when deciding whether or not to provide or
participate in procedures/interventions requested by
patients. The CMA supports physicians who,
for reasons of moral commitments to patients and for any other
reasons of conscience, provide or facilitate legal
procedures/interventions or refuse to do so. To enable physicians to adhere to such moral
commitments without causing undue delay for patients
requesting procedures/interventions, health systems will need to implement mechanisms
that allow patients to easily obtain
direct access to them. It is a responsibility of the community to ensure access, rather
than placing the burden of finding services solely on individual
physicians. Further, the CMA believes that physicians' general employment or
contract opportunities should not be influenced by their
conscientious decisions
to participate in, or not participate in, the delivery of
procedures/interventions. The right of patients to
seek procedures/interventions does not compel individual
physicians to provide or facilitate them. Learners should be equally free to follow
their conscience without risk to their evaluations and training
advancement.
Fiduciary obligations:
The physician as fiduciary has long been
ensconced in ethics and law on the view that the patient-physician
relationship hinges on the physician's duty to act, among other
fiduciary duties, to protect and further their patients' best
interests. The fiduciary nature of the patient-physician
relationship has been described as "the most fundamental
characteristic of the doctor-patient relationship" by Madame Justice
McLachlin in Norberg v. Wynrib (1992).However,
the physician's fiduciary obligation does not in any way mean
that the physician must violate her moral integrity, in such a way
that referral does for some objecting physicians.
Additional considerations: physician duties
1. Duty of non-abandonment: Physicians have an obligation to
respond to patient requests for procedures/interventions,
regardless of how
their moral commitment is expressed. Patients should never be
abandoned and must always be supported by their physician and other
members of their care team. There should be no undue delay in providing access to
procedures/interventions, either from a clinical,
system or facility perspective.
ADDRESSING ADHERENCE TO MORAL COMMITMENTS
CMA's position on conscientious participation and conscientious
objection aims to harmonize two legitimate considerations: (1)
effective patient access to a legally permissible medical service
and (2) protection of physicians' freedom of conscience (or moral
integrity) in a way that respects differences of conscience.
For the majority of physicians who will
choose not to provide a procedure/intervention
referral is entirely morally acceptable;
it is not a violation of their conscience. For others, referral is
categorically morally unacceptable; it implies forced participation
procedurally that may be connected to, or make them complicit in,
what they deem to be a morally abhorrent act. In other words,
to make referral mandatory
respects the conscience of some, but not
others. It is the CMA's strongly held position that there is
no legitimate justification to respect one judgement of conscience (such
as the right not to participate in
assisted dying), while wholly discounting another because one may
not agree with it.
Prev | Next