The Experts below are selected from a list of 3333 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Jeremy K Kessler - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • the invention of a human right Conscientious Objection at the united nations 1947 2011
    Columbia Human Rights Law Review, 2013
    Co-Authors: Jeremy K Kessler
    Abstract:

    The right of Conscientious Objection to military service is the most startling of human rights. While human rights generally seek to protect individuals from state power, the right of Conscientious Objection radically alters the citizen-state relationship, subordinating a state’s decisions about national security to the beliefs of the individual citizen. In a world of nation-states jealous of their sovereignty, how did the human right of Conscientious Objection become an international legal doctrine? By answering that question, this Article both clarifies the legal pedigree of the human right of Conscientious Objection and sheds new light on the relationship between international human rights law and national sovereignty.

Özgür Heval Çınar - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Conscientious Objection to Military Service
    Conscientious Objection to Military Service in International Human Rights Law, 2020
    Co-Authors: Özgür Heval Çınar
    Abstract:

    Conscientious Objection has travelled a long way since the first known Conscientious objector was executed in the third century because of his religious pacifism; today, international and national mechanisms have begun to accept Conscientious Objection for religious, ethical, moral, philosophical, humanitarian, or similar motives; that is to say, on nonreligious as well as solely religious grounds.1

  • Conscientious Objection to Military Service in International Human Rights Law
    2013
    Co-Authors: Özgür Heval Çınar
    Abstract:

    This book is composed of five chapters. The first chapter explores the concept of conscience with a view to understanding the meaning and potential scope of the right to Conscientious Objection from a legal perspective. The second chapter examines the evolution of the concept of Conscientious Objection. The third chapter defines various types of Conscientious objectors in the light of the evolution of Conscientious Objection. The forth chapter will examine the United Nations mechanisms` approach on the issue of the right to Conscientious Objection. The last chapter analyses the European and Inter-American mechanisms.

  • Conscientious Objection: Resisting Militarized Society
    2009
    Co-Authors: Özgür Heval Çınar, Coşkun Üsterci
    Abstract:

    * Acknowledgements * Preface - Cynthia Cockburn * Introduction - Coskun Usterci and Ozgur Heval Cinar * Part I: Conscription and resisting conscription in a militarized society ** 1. The militarization of society: conscription and national armies in the process of citizen creation - Suavi Aydin ** 2. Patriotism and the justification of inequality in the construction of militarism - Melek Goregenli ** 3. Refusing to serve by other means: desertion in the late Ottoman Empire - Erik-Jan Zurcher ** 4. Sand in the wheels? Conscientious Objection at the turn of the twenty-first century - Ulrich Brockling ** 5. The morals and politics of Conscientious Objection, civil disobedience and anti-militarism | Nilgun Toker Kilinc ** 6. The philosophical grounds of Conscientious Objection - Taha Parla * Part II: Conscientious Objection as a critique of patriarchy, sexism and heterosexism ** 7. Where are the women in military Conscientious Objection? Some feminist clues - Cynthia Enloe ** 8. Refusing to identify as obedient wives, sacrificing mothers and proud warriors - Ayse Gul Altinay ** 9. Conscientious Objection and masculine violence - Serpil Sancar ** 10. Rotten report and reconstructing hegemonic masculinity in Turkey - Alp Biricik * Part III: Conscientious Objection in the world: experiences and problems ** 11. Experiences of Conscientious Objection movements: South Africa, Greece and Paraguay - Andreas Speck and Rudi Friedrich ** 12. Military conscription, Conscientious Objection and democratic citizenship in the Americas - Matthew C. Gutmann ** 13. Conscientious Objection in Chile - Pelao Carvallo ** 14. Conscientious Objection in Spain: disobedience - Cthuchi Zamarra ** 15. Conscientious Objection in Israel - Tali Lerner ** 16. Refusing to serve in the army for reasons of conscience in Greece - Alexia Tsouni and Michalis Maragakis ** 17. Conscientious Objection in Turkey - Coskun Usterci and Ugur Yorulmaz * Part IV: Conscientious Objection and law * A International law ** 18. A view on international implementation of the right to Conscientious Objection - Ozgur Heval Cinar ** 19. International standards on Conscientious Objection to military and alternative service - Rachel Brett ** 20. European standards on Conscientious Objection and alternative service - Friedhelm Schneider ** 21. Conscientious Objection in international law and the Osman Murat Ulke case - Kevin Boyle * B The case of Turkey ** 22. Conscientious Objection and the Turkish constitution - Osman Can ** 23. The criminality of Conscientious Objection in Turkey and its consequences - Hulya Ucpinar * Notes on contributors * Index

Christopher Cowley - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Selective Conscientious Objection in Healthcare
    The New bioethics : a multidisciplinary journal of biotechnology and the body, 2019
    Co-Authors: Christopher Cowley
    Abstract:

    Most discussions of Conscientious Objection in healthcare assume that the Objection is universal: a doctor objects to all abortions. I want to investigate selective Objections, where a doctor objec...

  • a defence of Conscientious Objection in medicine a reply to schuklenk and savulescu
    Bioethics, 2016
    Co-Authors: Christopher Cowley
    Abstract:

    In a recent (2015) Bioethics editorial, Udo Schuklenk argues against allowing Canadian doctors to Conscientiously object to any new euthanasia procedures approved by Parliament. In this he follows Julian Savulescu's 2006 BMJ paper which argued for the removal of the Conscientious Objection clause in the 1967 UK Abortion Act. Both authors advance powerful arguments based on the need for uniformity of service and on analogies with reprehensible kinds of personal exemption. In this article I want to defend the practice of Conscientious Objection in publicly-funded healthcare systems (such as those of Canada and the UK), at least in the area of abortion and end-of-life care, without entering either of the substantive moral debates about the permissibility of either. My main claim is that Schuklenk and Savulescu have misunderstood the special nature of medicine, and have misunderstood the motivations of the Conscientious objectors. However, I acknowledge Schuklenk's point about differential access to lawful services in remote rural areas, and I argue that the health service should expend more to protect Conscientious Objection while ensuring universal access.

Jonathan Hughes - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Conscientious Objection, professional duty and compromise: A response to Savulescu and Schuklenk
    Bioethics, 2017
    Co-Authors: Jonathan Hughes
    Abstract:

    : In a recent article in this journal, Savulescu and Schuklenk defend and extend their earlier arguments against a right to medical Conscientious Objection in response to criticisms raised by Cowley. I argue that while it would be preferable to be less accommodating of medical Conscientious than many countries currently are, Savulescu and Schuklenk's argument that Conscientious Objection is 'simply unprofessional' is mistaken. The professional duties of doctors should be defined in relation to the interests of patients and society, and for reasons set out in this article, these may support limited accommodation of Conscientious Objection on condition that it does not impede access to services. Moreover, the fact that Conscientious Objection appears to involve unjustifiable compromise from the objector's point of view is not a reason for society not to offer that compromise. Arguing for robust enforcement of the no-impediment condition, rather than opposing Conscientious Objection in principle, may be a more effective way of addressing the harms resulting from an over-permissive Conscientious Objection policy.

  • Conscientious Objection in healthcare: why tribunals might be the answer
    Journal of Medical Ethics, 2016
    Co-Authors: Jonathan Hughes
    Abstract:

    A recent focus of the debate on Conscientious Objection in healthcare is the question of whether practitioners should have to justify their refusal to perform certain functions. A recent article by Cowley addresses a practical aspect of this controversy, namely the question of whether doctors claiming Conscientious objector status in relation to abortion should be required, like their counterparts claiming exemption from military conscription, to defend their claim before a tribunal. Cowley argues against the use of tribunals in the medical case, on the grounds that there are likely to be fewer unjustified claims to Conscientious Objection in this context than in the military, and that in any case tribunals will not be an effective way of distinguishing genuine and false cases. I reject these arguments and propose a different conception of the role of a medical Conscientious Objection tribunal.

Gry Wester - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Conscientious Objection by health care professionals
    Philosophy Compass, 2015
    Co-Authors: Gry Wester
    Abstract:

    Certain health care services and goods, although legal and often generally accepted in a society, are by some considered morally problematic. Debates on Conscientious Objection in health care try to resolve whether and when physicians, nurses and pharmacists should be allowed to refuse to provide medical services and goods because of their ethical or religious beliefs. These debates have most often focused on issues such as how to balance the interests of patients and health care professionals, and the compatibility of Conscientious Objection with professional obligations, but it is also possible to think about Conscientious Objection in terms of how to respond to moral disagreement and the requirements of liberal neutrality.