TY - JOUR
T1 - Should professional interpreters be able to conscientiously object in healthcare settings?
AU - Emmerich, Nathan
AU - Phillips, Christine
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 Author(s) (or their employer(s)). No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
PY - 2020/10/1
Y1 - 2020/10/1
N2 - In a globalised world, healthcare professionals will inevitably find themselves caring for patients whose first language differs from their own. Drawing on experiences in Australia, this paper examines a specific problem that can arise in medical consultations using professional interpreters: whether the moral objections of interpreters should be accommodated as conscientious objections if and when their services are required in contexts where healthcare professionals have such entitlements, most notably in relation to consultations concerning termination of pregnancy and voluntary assisted dying. We argue that existing statements of professional ethics suggest that interpreters should not be accorded such rights. The social organisation of healthcare and interpreting services in Australia may mean those who have serious objections to particular medical practices could provide their services in restricted healthcare contexts. Nevertheless, as a general rule, interpreters who have such objections should avoid working within healthcare.
AB - In a globalised world, healthcare professionals will inevitably find themselves caring for patients whose first language differs from their own. Drawing on experiences in Australia, this paper examines a specific problem that can arise in medical consultations using professional interpreters: whether the moral objections of interpreters should be accommodated as conscientious objections if and when their services are required in contexts where healthcare professionals have such entitlements, most notably in relation to consultations concerning termination of pregnancy and voluntary assisted dying. We argue that existing statements of professional ethics suggest that interpreters should not be accorded such rights. The social organisation of healthcare and interpreting services in Australia may mean those who have serious objections to particular medical practices could provide their services in restricted healthcare contexts. Nevertheless, as a general rule, interpreters who have such objections should avoid working within healthcare.
KW - applied and professional ethics
KW - codes of/position statements on professional ethics
KW - conscientious objection
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85076025655&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1136/medethics-2019-105767
DO - 10.1136/medethics-2019-105767
M3 - Article
SN - 0306-6800
VL - 46
SP - 700
EP - 704
JO - Journal of Medical Ethics
JF - Journal of Medical Ethics
IS - 10
ER -