Our continuing surge in new technology has awakened conscience-clause issues after a twenty-year quiescence.~1 The awakening has brought about gubernatorial edicts, state administrative position statements, court decisions, and a spate of professional and media opinion pieces questioning a pharmacist's right to practice according to conscience.~2 The current dispute brings a healthcare professional's right to practice according to religious conscience and a woman's right to Plan B contraception into sharp relief. Most of these writings address mid-level issues, particularly conflicting rights and conflicting principles. Little has been written about the core from which these conflicts derive, that is, conflicting worldviews. The following reflection analyzes an underlying historical shift in worldview that dominates political, legal, and ethical discourse in the emergency contraception debate in the United States. This article attempts to clarify the terms, issues, and worldview changes, revealing a shift in the ethical voices that dominate the healthcare practice. The goal is to promote a better understanding of why difficulties exist in finding suitable points of compromise as a starting point for resolution.
展开▼
