Showing posts with label Conscientious objection. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Conscientious objection. Show all posts

Saturday, October 01, 2016

Constitutional Challenge Filed To Illinois Limits on Conscientious Objection By Doctors

A suit was filed this week in an Illinois federal district court by several pro-life pregnancy centers challenging the constitutionality recently enacted amendments to Illinois Health Care Right of Conscience Act. (See prior posting.)  The new amendments require doctors and health care facilities to inform patients of all health care options and, if the patient requests an option to which the physician has conscientious objections, the physician must refer or transfer the patient elsewhere for the procedure. The complaint (full text) in National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Rauner, (ND IL, filed 9/29/2016), alleges that the amendments violate their religious freedom rights and require them to engage in compelled speech:
It would violate the religious and moral beliefs and conscience of Plaintiffs and their staff to comply with SB 1564 § 6.1(1)’s requirement that for every pregnant woman they treat, they must “inform” her that abortion as a “legal treatment option,” and that they must describe “benefits” of abortion that they disagree with.
ADF issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit.

Tuesday, September 20, 2016

European Court: Greece Violated Rights of Conscientious Objector

In Papavasilakis v. Greece, (ECHR, Sept. 15, 2016) [full text in French], the European Court of Human Rights in a Chamber Judgment found that a Jehovah's Witness' freedom of thought, conscience and religion (Art. 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights) were infringed by procedures used in Greece to consider his application to perform alternative civilian service instead of military service. As summarized by the Court's English-language press release:
Domestic law provided that the Special Board, when it examined applications for exemption from military service for conscientious objectors, had to be composed of two university professors, one senior or other advisor at the State Legal Council and two high-ranking army officers. Accordingly, if at the time it interviewed Mr Papavasilakis the Special Board had sat with all of its members present, the majority would have been civilians. However, only the two officers and the chairman were present on that day. In the Court’s view Mr Papavasilakis could thus have legitimately feared that, not being a member of a religious community, he would not succeed in conveying his ideological beliefs to career officers with senior positions in the military hierarchy.
A Chamber Judgment may be appealed to the Grand Chamber.

Friday, August 05, 2016

Illinois Governor Signs Bill Amending Conscience Protections For Health Care Personnel

In Illinois last week, Republican Governor Bruce Rauner signed SB 1564 (full text), amending the state's Health Care Right of Conscience Act. The new Act requires health care facilities to adopt written protocols that assure conscience-based objections by medical personnel will not impair patients' health. Among the minimum standards for these protocols are the following:
(1) The health care facility, physician, or health care personnel shall inform a patient of the patient's condition, prognosis, legal treatment options, and risks and benefits of the treatment options in a timely manner, consistent with current standards of medical practice or care.
(2) When a health care facility, physician, or health care personnel is unable to permit, perform, or participate in a health care service that is a diagnostic or treatment option requested by a patient because the health care service is contrary to the conscience of the health care facility, physician, or health care personnel, then the patient shall either be provided the requested health care service by others in the facility or be notified that the health care will not be provided and be referred, transferred, or given information in accordance with paragraph (3).
(3) If requested by the patient or the legal representative of the patient, the health care facility, physician, or health care personnel shall: (i) refer the patient to, or (ii) transfer the patient to, or (iii) provide in writing information to the patient about other health care providers who they reasonably believe may offer the health care service the health care facility, physician, or health personnel refuses to permit, perform, or participate in because of a conscience-based objection.
Reporting on the governor's action, the State Journal-Register says that the Illinois Catholic Health Association and Catholic Conference of Illinois took a neutral stand on the bill. However in a press release this week, Liberty Counsel complains that the new law forces "Christian and pro-life doctors and pregnancy centers to participate in human genocide."

Wednesday, June 08, 2016

European Court Says Turkish Objector Not Covered By European Convention on Human Rights

In Enver Aydemir v. Turkey, (ECHR, June 7, 2016) (full text of opinion in French), the European Court of Human Rights in a Chamber Judgment held that Article 9 (Freedom of thought, conscience and religion) of the European Convention on Human Rights does not protect a Turkish conscientious objector.  Enver Aydemir asserted that he objects to military service for the secular Republic of Turkey, but would serve under a system based on the Qur'an and subject to its rules. A press release by the Court summarized the Court's reasoning:
Mr Aydemir’s complaints did not involve a form of manifestation of a religion or belief through worship, teaching, practice or observance within the meaning of Article 9 § 1. Accordingly, the Court concluded that Mr Aydemir’s opposition to military service was not such as to entail the applicability of Article 9 of the Convention, and that the evidence before it did not suggest that his stated beliefs included a firm, fixed and sincere objection to participation in war in any form or to the bearing of arms.
The Court did find, however, that Mr. Ayedmir was subjected to inhuman and degrading treatment in violation of Article 3 of the ECHR in the investigation of charges against him, charges brought against him and mistreatment of him during confinement. The Court awarded Ayedmir damages of 15000 Euros plus 3000 Euros for costs and expenses.

Wednesday, September 30, 2015

Pope Francis Met With Kim Davis; Supports Conscientious Objection

In a press release issued yesterday, Liberty Counsel disclosed that Rowan County, Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis met with Pope Francis at the Vatican Embassy in Washington last Thursday. Davis' husband was also at the private meeting during which the Pope, speaking in English, thanked Davis for her courage and presented her with rosaries for her parents who are Catholic. Davis has refused to issue marriage licences to same-sex couples, and was jailed for contempt for several days as a result. (See prior posting.) In a press conference on his plane back to Rome (before the meeting with Davis was announced publicly), the Pope told reporters that conscientious objection is a human right. When asked whether that applies to government officials, the Pope responded: "It is a human right and if a government official is a human person, he has that right."