Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32627664›Full record

ArticleNursing ethics2020

Conscience and conscientious objection: The midwife's role in abortion services.

Beate Ramsayer, Valerie Fleming

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nursing ethics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Beate RamsayerLiverpool John Moores University, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1470-4434
Valerie FlemingLiverpool John Moores University, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Traditionally, the role of midwives has been to be with women throughout the pregnancy continuum, from conception until the end of the postnatal period. Midwives, however, have been named as key providers of abortion services. While freedom of conscience is legally protected within Europe, discrepancies exist between midwifery and conscientious objection to abortion-related services. Midwives are largely ignored within the academic discussion despite the care and support they give to women undergoing abortions. Those discrepancies led to the aim of this article to address this issue by discussing some of the key ethical and legal concepts that are relevant to midwives' role in the provision of abortion services.This article shows that the decision to provide or object to abortion services remains ethically very complex because arguments exist both for and against its provision. Being with women can be interpreted differently and individual situations of care are multifaceted. Conscientious objection to abortion services is a highly contentious issue that has an overall importance to midwives. Noting that decisions are individual, may change or may be situationally dependant; a definitive position of midwives for or against conscientious objection cannot be assumed.Respecting conscience and acknowledging that there are various arguments for and against conscientious objection promotes widespread understanding. It accommodates both the opportunity for midwives to object on conscience grounds to the provision of abortion services and respect women's autonomy so that mutual agreement may be reached on issues that may have far reaching consequences.

Indexed as

Abortionconscienceconscientious objectionmidwifery

Identifiers

PMID32627664
PMCPMC7575296

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.