Conscientious objection in Greater Glasgow Health Board v. Doogan and others [2014] UKSC

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debate

2 Citations (Scopus)
116 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

This commentary considers the decision of the Supreme Court (SC) in Greater Glasgow Health Board v. Doogan and Others, which concerns the definition of ‘participate’ in the context of abortion and the conscientious objection of healthcare professionals due to their religious beliefs. It is argued that the SC was correct in affirming the definition of participate as articulated by Lord Keith in Janaway v. Salford Area General Authority. The protection of conscientious objection, under Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights, is considered. The discussion in this commentary, however, is limited to religious belief and does not consider the wider ambit of Article 9, such as nonreligious philosophical beliefs.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)246
Number of pages254
JournalMedical Law International
Volume15
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 25 May 2016

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Conscientious objection in Greater Glasgow Health Board v. Doogan and others [2014] UKSC'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this