Search

Author(s): Harris, Laura Florence; Awoonor-Williams, John Koku; Gerdts, Caitlin; Gil Urbano, Laura; Gonzalez Velez, Ana Cristina; Halpern, Jodi; Prata, Ndola; Baffoe, Peter | Abstract: Conscientious objection to abortion, clinicians’ refusal to perform legal abortions because of their religious or moral beliefs, has been the subject of increasing debate among bioethicists, policymakers, and public health advocates in recent years. Conscientious objection policies are intended to balance reproductive rights and clinicians’ beliefs. However, in practice, clinician objection can act as a barrier to abortion access–impinging on reproductive rights, and increasing unsafe abortion and related morbidity and mortality. There is little information about conscientious objection from a medical or public health perspective. A quantitative instrument is needed to assess prevalence of conscientious objection and to provide insight on its practice. This paper describes the development of a survey instrument to measure conscientious objection to abortion provision.Methods: A literature review, and in-depth formative interviews with stakeholders in Colombia were used to develop a conceptual model of conscientious objection. This model led to the development of a survey, which was piloted, and then administered, in Ghana.Results: The model posits three domains of conscientious objection that form the basis for the survey instrument: 1) beliefs about abortion and conscientious objection; 2) actions related to conscientious objection and abortion; and 3) self-identification as a conscientious objector.Conclusions: The instrument is intended to be used to assess prevalence among clinicians trained to provide abortions, and to gain insight on how conscientious objection is practiced in a variety of settings. Its results can inform more effective and appropriate strategies to regulate conscientious objection.

Conscientious objection to abortion - a clinician's refusal to perform abortions because of moral or religious beliefs - is a limited right, intended to protect clinicians' convictions while maintaining abortion access. This paper argues that conscientious objection policies and debates around the world generally do not take into account the social, political, and economic pressures that profoundly influence clinicians who must decide whether to claim objector status. Lack of clarity about abortion policies, high workload, low pay, and stigma towards abortion providers can discourage abortion provision. As the only legal way to refuse to provide abortions that are permitted by law, conscientious objection can become a safety valve for clinicians under pressure and may be claimed by clinicians who do not have moral or religious objections. Social factors including stigma also shape how stakeholders and policy-makers approach conscientious objection. To appropriately limit the scope of conscientious objection and make protection of conscience more meaningful, more information is needed about how conscientious objection is practised. Additionally, abortion trainings should include information about conscientious objection and its limits, reproductive rights, and creating an enabling environment for abortion provision. Policy-makers and all stakeholders should also focus on creating an enabling environment and reducing stigma.

Background Pre-eclampsia/eclampsia is one of the most common causes of maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality in low and middle income countries. Magnesium sulfate is the drug of choice for prevention of seizures as part of comprehensive management of the disease. Despite the compelling evidence for the effectiveness of magnesium sulfate, concern has been expressed about its safety and potential for toxicity, particularly among providers in low- and middle-income countries. The purpose of this review was to determine whether the literature published in these global settings supports the concerns about the safety of use of magnesium sulfate. Methods An integrative review of the literature was conducted to document the known incidences of severe adverse reactions to magnesium sulphate, and specific outcomes of interest related to its use. All types of prospective clinical studies were included if magnesium sulfate was used to manage pre-eclampsia or eclampsia, the study was conducted in a low- or middle-income country, and the study included the recording of the incidence of any adverse side effect resulting from magnesium sulfate use. Results A total of 24 studies that compared a magnesium sulfate regimen against other drug regimens and examined side effects among 34 subject groups were included. The overall rate of absent patellar reflex among all 9556 aggregated women was 1.6%, with a range of 0-57%. The overall rate of respiratory depression in 25 subject groups in which this outcome was reported was 1.3%, with a range of 0–8.2%. Delay in repeat administration of magnesium sulfate occurred in 3.6% of cases, with a range of 0-65%. Calcium gluconate was administered at an overall rate of less than 0.2%. There was only one maternal death that was attributed by the study authors to the use of magnesium sulfate among the 9556 women in the 24 studies. Conclusion Concerns about safety and toxicity from the use of magnesium sulfate should be mitigated by findings from this integrative review, which indicates a low incidence of the most severe side effects, documented in studies that used a wide variety of standard and modified drug regimens. Adverse effects of concern to providers occur infrequently, and when they occurred, a delay of repeat administration was generally sufficient to mitigate the effect. Early screening and diagnosis of the disease, appropriate treatment with proven drugs, and reasonable vigilance for women under treatment should be adopted as global policy and practice.