Cover Image
QR Code

Conscience Clause Laws Already Permit Secular Hospitals to Withhold or Withdraw Life-Sustaining Treatment over Surrogate Objections.

The article examines the legal and ethical framework allowing hospitals in the U.S. to refuse or withdraw life-sustaining treatment without surrogate consent, focusing on two exceptions: professional reasons and reasons of conscience. It highlights that while hospitals’ ability to refuse treatment f...

Full description

Published in:American Journal of Bioethics Vol. 26; no. 7; pp. 77 - 80
Main Author: Pope, Thaddeus Mason
Format: Journal Article
Published: Taylor & Francis Ltd Jul2026
Online Access:View this record in EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=194782894&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ccm
    uiTerm: 194782894
    longDbName: CINAHL Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    dissinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        15265161
        FKZ
      jtl: American Journal of Bioethics
      issn: 15265161
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Jul2026
      vid: 26
      iid: 7
      pid: 377
      pub: Taylor & Francis Ltd
      place: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
    artinfo:
      ui:
        194782894
        10.1080/15265161.2026.2675912
        194782894
      ppf: 77
      ppct: 3
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
      tig:
        atl: Conscience Clause Laws Already Permit Secular Hospitals to Withhold or Withdraw Life-Sustaining Treatment over Surrogate Objections.
      aug:
        au: Pope, Thaddeus Mason
        affil: Mitchell Hamline School of Law
      sug:
        subj:
          Life Support Care Legislation and Jurisprudence
          Life Support Care Ethical Issues
          Conscience Legislation and Jurisprudence
          Treatment Withdrawal Legislation and Jurisprudence
          Treatment Withdrawal Ethical Issues
          Decision Making, Ethical Legislation and Jurisprudence
          Hospitals Legislation and Jurisprudence
          Decision Making, Family Ethical Issues
          Decision Making, Family Legislation and Jurisprudence
          Refusal to Treat Ethical Issues
          Refusal to Treat Legislation and Jurisprudence
          Bioethics
          Organizational Objectives
          Organizational Culture
          Organizational Policies
          Health Services Accessibility Ethical Issues
          Health Services Accessibility Legislation and Jurisprudence
          United States
      ab: The article examines the legal and ethical framework allowing hospitals in the U.S. to refuse or withdraw life-sustaining treatment without surrogate consent, focusing on two exceptions: professional reasons and reasons of conscience. It highlights that while hospitals’ ability to refuse treatment for professional reasons is increasingly constrained, institutional conscience rights—already supported by federal and state laws such as healthcare decisions laws, panoramic conscience clause laws, and treatment-specific statutes—offer a distinct and expanding basis for refusal. The article discusses how secular hospitals, not just religious ones, assert conscience-based objections and emphasizes the importance of transparency and patient transfer options to mitigate potential harms from institutional refusals. It concludes that as medical standards become more contested, hospitals may increasingly rely on conscience rights to justify treatment refusals.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Journal Article
      ougenre: Article
    language: English
    refInfo:
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N