“The Fetus Is My Patient, Too”: Attitudes Toward Abortion and Referral Among Physician Conscientious Objectors in Bogotá, Colombia

• Published in: International family planning perspectives Vol. 42; no. 2; pp. 71 - 80
• Main Authors: Fink, Lauren R., Stanhope, Kaitlyn K., Rochat, Roger W., Bernal, Oscar A.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Guttmacher Institute 01.06.2016
• Subjects: Abortion; Abortion, Legal; Age differences; Attitude; Attitude of Health Personnel; Attitudes; Beliefs, opinions and attitudes; Colombia; Communication; Conscience; Conscientious objection; Conscientious objectors; Constitutional courts; Data collection; Decriminalization; Female; Fetus; Fetuses; Gestational age; Health care policy; Human rights; Humans; Legal objections; Maternal mortality; Medical ethics; Medical referral; Medical referrals; Medical research; Medicine, Experimental; Morbidity; Patients; Physicians; Pregnancy; Pro choice movement; Public opinion; Qualitative research; R&D; Rape; Recruitment; Referral and Consultation; Referrals; Refusal to Treat; Reproductive health; Research & development; Respondents; Sampling; Women; Womens health; Womens health services; Colombia; United States > US
• ISSN: 1944-0391; 1944-0405
• DOI: 10.1363/42e1016

CONTEXT: In 2006, the Colombian Constitutional Court partially decriminalized abortion. However, barriers to access, including improper use of conscientious objection, remain. METHODS: To explore conscientious objection from the objectors’ perspectives, in-depth interviews were conducted in 2014 with 13 key informants and with 15 Colombian physicians who self-identified as conscientious objectors. Recruitment included snowball and purposive sampling techniques.  Analysis was conducted in tandem with data collection and focused on objectors’ attitudes, beliefs and behaviors related to abortion and referral. RESULTS: Objectors had varied perspectives. Three types of objectors were evident: extreme, moderate and partial. Extreme objectors refused to perform abortions or make referrals, and often lectured their patients; they also provided misleading or false medical and legal information, preventing women from accessing abortions to which they were legally entitled. Moderate objectors would not perform abortions, but respected their patients and viewed referral as a way to save “one out of two” lives. Partial objectors performed some abortions but refused to do others on the basis of gestational age or case-by-case circumstances. Across the typology, objectors linked conscientious objection with medical ethics, and many described a duty to protect the fetus, which they conceptualized as a patient. CONCLUSION: Conscientious objectors exhibit diverse opinions and behaviors. Potential areas for future investigation include identifying factors that lead objectors to refer and estimating the prevalence of each type of objector. Results suggest potential interventions that could reduce the role of conscientious objection as a barrier to care.