Trends in adolescent males' abortion attitudes, 1988-1995: differences by race and ethnicity.
(9/392)
CONTEXT: Studying how adolescent males view abortion and how their attitudes toward abortion have changed over time can improve our understanding of the sexual, contraceptive and abortion behavior of these males and their partners. METHODS: Data from the 1988 and 1995 National Survey of Adolescent Males are used to describe changes in young males' attitudes toward abortion over time, as well as differences in abortion attitudes by race and ethnicity. Multivariate models are used to examine the relationship between religiosity and abortion attitudes. RESULTS: Between 1988 and 1995, young males' approval of abortion decreased significantly. In 1995, 24% of U.S. males aged 15-19 agreed that it was all right for a woman to have an abortion "for any reason," down from 37% in 1988. This decrease was driven almost entirely by non-Hispanic white males; there was little change in the abortion attitudes of non-Hispanic blacks and Hispanics. The decrease in white males' approval of abortion coincides with a significant increase in the self-reported importance of religion and in the proportion of whites who identified themselves as born-again Christians. The proportion of non-Hispanic white males indicating that religion was very important increased from 28% in 1988 to 34% in 1995, while the proportion identifying themselves as born-again increased from 18% to 24%. Multivariate analyses indicate that religiosity was more strongly related to the abortion attitudes of non-Hispanic whites than to those of Hispanics or non-Hispanic blacks. CONCLUSIONS: The large decrease in approval of abortion among white teenage males has closed the racial and ethnic gap in attitudes toward abortion that was evident in 1988, when such youth held significantly more liberal attitudes toward abortion than did either Hispanics or blacks. This trend toward more conservative abortion-related attitudes among whites coincides with increasingly conservative attitudes regarding premarital sex and greater religiosity among white male adolescents. (+info)
Backing onto sacred ground.
(10/392)
It is widely recognized that the health of individuals and communities is determined by the interaction of physical, mental, social, and spiritual factors. Public health leaders can find precedent for the resulting holistic strategies in the collaboration with religious structures that characterized the early years of public health. The modern context is more pluralistic, democratic, and complex in terms of its institutional array of partners. (+info)
Informed consent for emergency contraception: variability in hospital care of rape victims.
(11/392)
There is growing concern that rape victims are not provided with emergency contraceptives in many hospital emergency rooms, particularly in Catholic hospitals. In a small pilot study, we examined policies and practices relating to providing information, prescriptions, and pregnancy prophylaxis in emergency rooms. We held structured telephone interviews with emergency department personnel in 58 large urban hospitals, including 28 Catholic hospitals, from across the United States. Our results showed that some Catholic hospitals have policies that prohibit the discussion of emergency contraceptives with rape victims, and in some of these hospitals, a victim would learn about the treatment only by asking. Such policies and practices are contrary to Catholic teaching. More seriously, they undermine a victim's right to information about her treatment options and jeopardize physicians' fiduciary responsibility to act in their patients' best interests. We suggest that institutions must reevaluate their restrictive policies. If they fail to do so, we believe that state legislation requiring hospitals to meet the standard of care for treatment of rape victims is appropriate. (+info)
Marie Stopes Memorial Lecture 1975.(12/392)
The compulsory pregnancy lobby--then and now.
(+info)
Why some Jehovah's Witnesses accept blood and conscientiously reject official Watchtower Society blood policy.
(13/392)
In their responses to Dr Osamu Muramoto (hereafter Muramoto) Watchtower Society (hereafter WTS) spokesmen David Malyon and Donald Ridley (hereafter Malyon and Ridley), deny many of the criticisms levelled against the WTS by Muramoto. In this paper I argue as a Jehovah's Witness (hereafter JW) and on behalf of the members of AJWRB that there is no biblical basis for the WTS's partial ban on blood and that this dissenting theological view should be made clear to all JW patients who reject blood on religious grounds. Such patients should be guaranteed confidentiality should they accept whole blood or components that are banned by the WTS. I argue against Malyon's and Ridley's claim that WTS policy allows freedom of conscience to individual JWs and that it is non-coercive and non-punitive in dealing with conscientious dissent and I challenge the notion that there is monolithic support of the WTS blood policy among those who identify themselves as JWs and carry the WTS "advance directive". (+info)
Medical confidentiality and the protection of Jehovah's Witnesses' autonomous refusal of blood.
(14/392)
Mr Ridley of the Watch Tower Society (WTS), the controlling religious organisation of Jehovah's Witnesses (JWs), mischaracterises the issue of freedom and confidentiality in JWs' refusal of blood by confusing inconsistent organisational policies with actual Biblical proscriptions. Besides exaggeration and distortion of my writings, Ridley failed to present substantive evidence to support his assertion that no pressure exists to conform to organisational policy nor systematic monitoring which compromises medical confidentiality. In this refutation, I present proof from the WTS's literature, supported by personal testimonies of JWs, that the WTS enforces its policy of blood refusal by coercive pressure to conform and through systematic violation of medical confidentiality. Ridley's lack of candour in dealing with the plea of dissident JWs for freedom to make personal and conscientious decisions regarding blood indicates that a serious breach of ethics in the medical care of JWs continues. The medical community should be seriously concerned. (+info)
Bioethics for clinicians: 19. Hinduism and Sikhism.
(15/392)
Hindus and Sikhs constitute important minority communities in Canada. Although their cultural and religious traditions have profound differences, they both traditionally take a duty-based rather than rights-based approach to ethical decision-making. These traditions also share a belief in rebirth, a concept of karma (in which experiences in one life influence experiences in future lives), an emphasis on the value of purity, and a holistic view of the person that affirms the importance of family, culture, environment and the spiritual dimension of experience. Physicians with Hindu and Sikh patients need to be sensitive to and respectful of the diversity of their cultural and religious assumptions regarding human nature, purity, health and illness, life and death, and the status of the individual. (+info)
Medical ethics and Islam: principles and practice.
(16/392)
A minimum level of cultural awareness is a necessary prerequisite for the delivery of care that is culturally sensitive. In this paper we simplify and highlight certain key teachings in Islamic medical ethics and explore their applications. We hope that the insights gained will aid clinicians to better understand their Muslim patients and deliver care that pays due respect to their beliefs. (+info)