Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41749252›Full record

ArticleBMC medical ethics2026

Ethical perspectives of obstetricians and gynecologists on induced abortion and conscientious objection in Türkiye: a phenomenological study.

Maide Barış, Hatice Büşra Arısın, Kerem Arısın, Sare Dilara Koltuk, Aliye Çağlar, Aleyna Nur Ortaklar, Berkay Pehlivaner, Merve Saraçoğlu, Julian Savulescu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical ethics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

9 authors.

Maide BarışDepartment of Medical History and Ethics, Marmara University, Faculty of Medicine, Başıbüyük Campus, No:9/2, Office: 3065, Maltepe, Istanbul, 34854, Türkiye.ORCID 0000-0001-7445-4599
Hatice Büşra ArısınDepartment of Public Health, Marmara University, Faculty of Medicine, Başıbüyük Campus, No:9/2, Maltepe, Istanbul, 34854, Türkiye.ORCID 0009-0008-6860-5723
Kerem ArısınDepartment of Public Health, Marmara University, Faculty of Medicine, Başıbüyük Campus, No:9/2, Maltepe, Istanbul, 34854, Türkiye.ORCID 0009-0004-4613-6445
Sare Dilara KoltukMarmara University, School of Medicine, Başıbüyük Campus, No:9/2, Maltepe, Istanbul, 34854, Türkiye.ORCID 0009-0009-2629-5365
Aliye ÇağlarMarmara University, School of Medicine, Başıbüyük Campus, No:9/2, Maltepe, Istanbul, 34854, Türkiye.ORCID 0009-0007-6242-8036
Aleyna Nur OrtaklarMarmara University, School of Medicine, Başıbüyük Campus, No:9/2, Maltepe, Istanbul, 34854, Türkiye.ORCID 0009-0003-7685-7297
Berkay PehlivanerMarmara University, School of Medicine, Başıbüyük Campus, No:9/2, Maltepe, Istanbul, 34854, Türkiye.ORCID 0009-0007-2106-0458
Merve SaraçoğluDepartment of Medical Education, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan University, Faculty of Medicine, Rize, Türkiye.ORCID 0000-0002-2518-6230
Julian SavulescuCentre for Biomedical Ethics, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore. julian.savulescu@uehiro.ox.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-1691-6403

Funding

Wellcome Trust 226801
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough abortion has been legally permitted in Türkiye for up to ten weeks since 1983, access in public hospitals has been reported to decline over the past decade due to clinicians’ refusals and institutional restrictions, despite the absence of a formal legal framework for conscientious objection. This study aims to explore the experiences and ethical reasoning of Turkish obstetricians and gynecologists regarding abortion practice and conscientious objection, with the goal of illuminating the ethico-legal tensions at play and informing clearer regulatory and institutional guidelines.

methodsThis study employed a qualitative, phenomenological design. Fourteen specialists were recruited via purposive and snowball sampling; semi-structured online interviews were conducted between January–May 2025 using a guide with four interrelated domains. Audio was transcribed verbatim and analyzed in MAXQDA-10. A three-stage, iterative thematic analysis (independent coding, expert consultation, framework refinement) was undertaken until thematic saturation was confirmed.

resultsThematic analysis identified four main themes: (1) legal knowledge and clinical approach to abortion, (2) moral reasoning in abortion decisions, (3) operationalizing conscientious objection in clinical settings, and (4) ethical conflicts between conscience and care. Each of these themes consisted of several subthemes.

conclusionAbortion care in Türkiye is shaped by negotiations between law, morality, and institutional practice. Conscientious objection, though not legally recognized, is nonetheless practiced covertly as a contingent and relational stance, jeopardizing women’s reproductive autonomy. These findings underscore the fragility of reproductive rights and the urgent need for stronger policy frameworks to safeguard access, and autonomy.

Indexed as

Abortion, InducedAttitude of Health PersonnelConscienceConscientious Refusal to TreatRefusal to TreatAdultEthical DilemmasFemaleGynecologistsHumansMaleMiddle AgedObstetriciansPregnancyQualitative ResearchTurkeyClinical ethicsConscientious objectionInduced abortionQualitative researchReproductive rights

Identifiers

PMID41749252
PMCPMC13097852

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.