Dispute over the medical conscience clause and constitutional principles of equality and impartiality of public authorities Cover Image

Spór o medyczną klauzulę sumienia a konstytucyjne zasady równości i bezstronności światopoglądowej władz publicznych
Dispute over the medical conscience clause and constitutional principles of equality and impartiality of public authorities

Author(s): Jakub Pawlikowski
Subject(s): Law, Constitution, Jurisprudence, Constitutional Law
Published by: Katolicki Uniwersytet Lubelski Jana Pawła II - Wydział Prawa, Prawa Kanonicznego i Administracji
Keywords: sprzeciw sumienia; klauzula sumienia; conscience clause; conscientious objection; health care; principle of equality; principle of impartiality; medical personnel; freedom of conscience and religion

Summary/Abstract: The article analyzes the problem of conscientious objection from the perspective of the constitutional principles of equality (Article 32 of the Polish Constitution) and impartiality of public authorities (Article 25, para. 2). These principles prohibit the legislator and public authorities from introducing unjustified inequalities to legal relations in the public sphere, particularly in the area of fundamental rights and freedoms. They also prohibit the arbitrary support of one side of ideological disputes so that the fundamental rights of one party are not disproportionately restricted by privileging another party. In the area of health care, the need to protect human health or lives results in the obligation to provide effective access to health services for patients and the possibility to impose appropriate obligations and legal restrictions on the freedom of conscience of medical practitioners. However, the majority of cases when a conscientious objection is claimed in medical practice do not concern risky situations for the health or life of beneficiaries. Moreover, the behaviour of a conscientious objector in such cases follows from his or her will to respect the life of every human being. Disputes over the issue of protecting a conceived life are undoubtedly ideological. However, even when one assumes it is impossible to resolve them, there are no grounds for public authorities, in situations when there is no need to protect human life and health, to be on the side of the beliefs accepting the violation of human life while limiting the freedom of those assuming the opposite view to act in accordance with their conscience. Therefore, in cases that go beyond the need to protect health and life, the legislator should not arbitrarily limit the freedom of conscience of service providers. Otherwise, it violates the principle of equality in the area of fundamental rights and freedoms and creates a legal framework for discrimination against certain health care providers based on their profession, position or beliefs. It would also be inconsistent with the principle of equality to differentiate rights to conscientious objection between different groups of proffesionals involved in patients’ care.

  • Issue Year: 2019
  • Issue No: 22
  • Page Range: 41-82
  • Page Count: 42
  • Language: Polish