Cited by 397Ethics and bioethics in healthcareEthics in medical practiceMedical and Health Sciences Research

Religion, Conscience, and Controversial Clinical Practices

Open access
Curlin, Farr A., Lawrence, Ryan E., Chin, Marshall H., Lantos, John D.·2007·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There is a heated debate about whether health professionals may refuse to provide treatments to which they object on moral grounds. It is important to understand how physicians think about their ethical rights and obligations when such conflicts emerge in clinical practice. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of a stratified, random sample of 2000 practicing U.S. physicians from all specialties by mail. The primary criterion variables were physicians' judgments about their ethical rights and obligations when patients request a legal medical procedure to which the physician objects for religious or moral reasons. These procedures included administering terminal sedation in dying patients, providing abortion for failed contraception, and prescribing birth control to adolescents without parental approval. RESULTS: A total of 1144 of 1820 physicians (63%) responded to our survey. On the basis of our results, we estimate that most physicians believe that it is ethically permissible for doctors to explain their moral objections to patients (63%). Most also believe that physicians are obligated to present all options (86%) and to refer the patient to another clinician who does not object to the requested procedure (71%). Physicians who were male, those who were religious, and those who had personal objections to morally controversial clinical practices were less likely to report that doctors must disclose information about or refer patients for medical procedures to which the physician objected on moral grounds (multivariate odds ratios, 0.3 to 0.5). CONCLUSIONS: Many physicians do not consider themselves obligated to disclose information about or refer patients for legal but morally controversial medical procedures. Patients who want information about and access to such procedures may need to inquire proactively to determine whether their physicians would accommodate such requests.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejmsa065316

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Most spiritual needs of medical and psychiatric patients currently go unmet.

    “Studies of medical and psychiatric patients and those with terminal illnesses report that the vast majority have such needs, and most of those needs currently go unmet [579, 580].”

    From Religion, Spirituality, and Health: The Research and Clinical Implications (2012) · cites this paper as [579]

    The Discussion (page unavailable) concerns physicians’ willingness to disclose information about or refer patients for morally controversial treatments, not whether patients’ spiritual needs are met. Searches for spiritual needs among medical and psychiatric patients, including terminally ill patients, found no passage addressing that claim. (LLM, conf=0.75)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Studies of medical and psychiatric patients and those with terminal illnesses report that the vast majority have spiritual needs related to medical or psychiatric illness.

    “Studies of medical and psychiatric patients and those with terminal illnesses report that the vast majority have such needs, and most of those needs currently go unmet [579, 580].”

    From Religion, Spirituality, and Health: The Research and Clinical Implications (2012) · cites this paper as [579]

    The Methods and Questionnaire sections describe a survey of physicians about religious objections to controversial clinical practices, not studies of patients’ spiritual needs. A search for spiritual needs among medical, psychiatric, and terminally ill patients found no passage reporting that the vast majority have such needs. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Vischer RK. Conscience in context: pharmacist rights and the eroding moral marketplace. Stanford Law Pol Rev 2006; 17:83-119. Health Care Right of Conscience Act, 745 Ill. Comp. Stat. § 70/1-14.
  2. attitudes and self-reported behaviors regard- ing religion and spirituality in the clinical encounter. Med Care 2006;44:446-53.
  3. religious commitment contribute to indi- vidual life satisfaction? Soc Forces 1989; 68:100-23.
  4. Groves RM, Fowler FJ, Couper MP, Lepkowski JM, Singer E, Tourangeau R. Survey methodology. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley, 2004.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Curlin, F. A., Lawrence, R. E., Chin, M. H., & Lantos, J. D.
Affiliations
University of Chicago (US)
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2007-02-08
Volume
356
Issue
6
Pages
593-600
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2116738317
Cited by
397
References
18
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 52 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 30 · 2012: 20
FWCI
34.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • New England Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Greenwall Foundation (1 K23 AT002749)
  • National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine
  • National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (K23AT002749)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Ethics in medical practice
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Medical and Health Sciences Research
Keywords
physician refusal of treatment, physician ethical obligations, referral, palliative sedation, abortion, parental consent, physician attitudes, religion and medicine
MeSH terms
Abortion, Legal, Contraception, Cross-Sectional Studies, Ethics, Medical, Female, Humans, Male, Morals, Physicians, Surveys and Questionnaires, Religion and Medicine, United States, Refusal to Treat, Suicide, Assisted, Personal Autonomy, Bioethical Issues, Ethics, Clinical, Paternalism

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review