[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-447623-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":80,"doc-detail-447623-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":73,"head_meta":75,"extra_data":77,"updated_unix":79},105,"en","professional-obligations-and-the-demandingness-of-acting-against-ones-conscience","Professional obligations and the demandingness of acting against one′s conscience","","Conscience is invoked in healthcare to justify conscientious objection, namely clinicians refusing certain duties based on personal moral or religious views. A competing view holds that conscientious professionals should be able to set aside such views when they conflict with professional obligations. The article reframes this debate around demandingness: professionals typically assume additional risks and burdens, yet these have limits. It asks whether refusing to act against one’s conscience constitutes one such burden.",{"@graph":14,"@context":72},[15,34,55],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/professional-obligations-and-the-demandingness-of-acting-against-ones-conscience/447623/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/professional-obligations-and-the-demandingness-of-acting-against-ones-conscience/447623.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"dawugda","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-01","2026-09-29",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":22},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",{"@type":56,"mainEntity":57},"FAQPage",[58,64,68],{"name":59,"@type":60,"acceptedAnswer":61},"What is the article’s starting point about conscience in healthcare?","Question",{"text":62,"@type":63},"The article explains that conscience is commonly used to defend a right to conscientious objection, where healthcare professionals refuse certain activities due to personal moral or religious views.","Answer",{"name":65,"@type":60,"acceptedAnswer":66},"How does the article reframe the debate on conscientious objection?",{"text":67,"@type":63},"It proposes reframing the debate as a problem of demandingness—whether acting against one’s conscience counts as an ethically relevant additional burden within professional obligations.",{"name":69,"@type":60,"acceptedAnswer":70},"What key question does the article raise for healthcare professionals?",{"text":71,"@type":63},"It asks whether the extra burdens expected of healthcare professionals, compared with non-professionals, include the burden of acting against their own conscience.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":74,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":76,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":78,"site_id":7},447623,1790834604,{"code":4,"msg":81,"data":82},"success",[83,87,91,95,100,105,110,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":84,"show_sort_weight":85,"slug":86},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":88,"show_sort_weight":89,"slug":90},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":92,"show_sort_weight":93,"slug":94},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":96,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":97,"show_sort_weight":98,"slug":99},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":101,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":102,"show_sort_weight":103,"slug":104},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":106,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":107,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":111,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},8,30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":96,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":81,"data":131},{"doc_id":78,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":111,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":22,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":144,"read_time":108},3985747870947,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_3d24733baf745e90a7e4bdd5f77d97b2","Europe PMC unders uthManuscripts Europe M eC und Author Manuscripts  \n| Europe PMC Funders Group\u003Cbr>Author Manuscript\u003Cbr>J Med Ethics. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2026 January 01. |\n| --- |\n| Published in final edited form as:\u003Cbr>J Med Ethics. 2026 January ; 52(1): 58–65. doi:10.1136/jme-2024-110447 .\u003Cbr>Professional obligations and the demandingness of acting against one′s conscience\u003Cbr>Alberto Giubilini\u003Cbr>Uehiro Oxford Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.\u003Cbr>Abstract\u003Cbr>Conscience is typically invoked in healthcare to defend a right to conscientious objection, that is, the refusal by healthcare professionals to perform certain activities in the name of personal moral or religious views. On this approach, freedom of conscience should be respected when the individual is operating in a professional capacity. Others would argue, however, that a conscientious professional is one who can set aside one′s own moral or religious views when they conflict with professional obligations. The debate on conscientious objection has by and large crystallised around these two positions, with compromise positions aiming at striking a balance between the two, for instance, by arguing for referral requirements by objecting healthcare professionals.\u003Cbr>In this article, I suggest that the debate on conscientious objection in healthcare could benefit from being reframed as a problem around demandingness rather than one about freedom of conscience and moral integrity. Being a professional, and a healthcare professional specifically, typically requires taking on additional burdens compared with non-professionals. For instance, healthcare professionals are expected to take on themselves higher risks than the rest ofthe population. However, it is also widely agreed that there are limits to the additional risks and burdens that healthcare professionals should be expected to take on themselves. Thus, a question worth exploring is whether, among the extra burdens that healthcare professionals should be expected to take on themselves as a matter of professional obligation, there is the burden of acting against one′s own conscience.\u003Cbr>Introduction\u003Cbr>There has been a long-standing debate around the limits of a duty of care by healthcare professionals, that is, about how far healthcare professionals’ duty of care can go before\u003Cbr>This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: [https://creativecommons.org/](https://creativecommons.org/)[ ](https://creativecommons.org/)[licenses/by/4.0/](licenses/by/4.0/.This work is licensed under a BY 4.0 International license.)[.This work is licensed under a](licenses/by/4.0/.This work is licensed under a BY 4.0 International license.)[ BY 4.0](licenses/by/4.0/.This work is licensed under a BY 4.0 International license.)[ International license.](licenses/by/4.0/.This work is licensed under a BY 4.0 International license.)\u003Cbr>[Correspondence to: Alberto Giubilini.](Correspondence to: Alberto Giubilini.)\u003Cbr>Correspondence to Dr Alberto Giubilini; [alberto.giubilini@uehiro.ox.ac.uk](alberto.giubilini@uehiro.ox.ac.uk) .\u003Cbr>Contributors AG is the only author and guarantor.\u003Cbr>Competing interests None declared.\u003Cbr>Patient consent for publication Not applicable.\u003Cbr>Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed. |\n\nEurope PMC unders uthManuscripts Europe M eC und Author Manuscripts  \nGiubilini Page 2  \nrisks and burdens are considered too great and beyond the call of duty, for instance, during epidemics or other public health emergencies. There has been a long-standing debate about conscientious objection in healthcare, that is, on whether and when healthcare professionals should hav","cbCaimQPmGj0uFTx","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaimQPmGj0uFTx","pdf",315775,16,"English","# Abstract\n## Conscience and conscientious objection\n## Reframing as demandingness\n## Limits of professional burdens\n## Case study approach","[{\"question\":\"What is the article’s starting point about conscience in healthcare?\",\"answer\":\"The article explains that conscience is commonly used to defend a right to conscientious objection, where healthcare professionals refuse certain activities due to personal moral or religious views.\"},{\"question\":\"How does the article reframe the debate on conscientious objection?\",\"answer\":\"It proposes reframing the debate as a problem of demandingness—whether acting against one’s conscience counts as an ethically relevant additional burden within professional obligations.\"},{\"question\":\"What key question does the article raise for healthcare professionals?\",\"answer\":\"It asks whether the extra burdens expected of healthcare professionals, compared with non-professionals, include the burden of acting against their own conscience.\"}]","Professional obligations and the demandingness of acting against one′s conscience | PDF",1790721934]