Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Two worlds apart: religion and ethics

J Savulescu1

  • 1Murdoch Institute, Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Journal of Medical Ethics
|January 5, 1999
PubMed
Summary

Providing futile medical treatment based on religious beliefs is ethically problematic. This practice constitutes discrimination and highlights the divergence between religious and ethical principles.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Commercial Impacts on Assisted Reproductive Technology: A Scoping Review.

Journal of bioethical inquiry·2025
Same author

Ethical and practical questions in satisfying the human right to unconsciousness at the end of life: a reply.

Anaesthesia·2021
Same author

General anaesthesia does not inevitably result in apnoea or require ventilatory support.

Anaesthesia·2021
Same author

General anaesthesia in end-of-life care: extending the indications for anaesthesia beyond surgery.

Anaesthesia·2021
Same author

A right to be unconscious.

Anaesthesia·2019
Same author

Responsibility, prudence and health promotion.

Journal of public health (Oxford, England)·2018

Area of Science:

  • Bioethics
  • Philosophy of Religion
  • Medical Ethics

Background:

  • A recent article by Orr and Genesen proposes providing futile medical treatment upon patient request if based on religious beliefs.
  • This stance raises significant ethical concerns regarding the justification and implications of accommodating religious beliefs in medical decision-making.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To critically analyze the ethical implications of providing "inappropriate" medical treatments based on religious beliefs.
  • To argue against the special consideration of religious requests for futile medical care.
  • To highlight the distinction between religious practices and ethical principles in healthcare.

Main Methods:

  • Ethical argumentation and philosophical analysis.
  • Critique of the "special pleading" fallacy in the context of religious exemptions.
  • Comparative analysis of religious claims versus established ethical frameworks in medicine.

Main Results:

  • Acceding to religiously motivated requests for futile treatment implies a broader acceptance of harmful or cost-ineffective interventions.
  • Such a policy constitutes morally objectionable discrimination against non-religious individuals (atheists).
  • The differential treatment of religious versus secular requests exemplifies a fundamental divergence between religious doctrines and ethical practices.

Conclusions:

  • The ethical framework of medicine should not be compromised by accommodating religiously motivated requests for futile or inappropriate care.
  • Special treatment for religious beliefs in healthcare decisions leads to inequity and ethical inconsistencies.
  • A clear distinction must be maintained between religious freedom and the principles of sound medical ethics to ensure patient well-being and justice.
Keywords:
Death and EuthanasiaProfessional Patient RelationshipReligious Approach

Related Experiment Videos