The prestigious New England Journal of Medicine opposes conscientious objection to abortion and contraception in the US. In a stinging editorial, Julie Cantor, of UCLA School of Law, says that selfless professionalism must be restored to medical practice after years of "conscience creep" under the Bush administration. She backs President Obamas recent move to rescind Federal regulations which allow conscientious objection.

This state of flux presents an opportunity to reconsider the scope of conscience in health care. When broadly defined, conscience is a poor touchstone; it can result in a rule that knows no bounds. Indeed, it seems that our problem is not insufficient tolerance, but too much. We have created a state of 'conscience creep' in which all behavior becomes acceptable...

Medicine needs to embrace a brand of professionalism that demands less self-interest, not more. Conscientious objection makes sense with conscription, but it is worrisome when professionals who freely chose their field parse care and withhold information that patients need. As the gatekeepers to medicine, physicians and other health care providers have an obligation to choose specialties that are not moral minefields for them... Federal laws may make room for the rights of conscience, but health care providers and all those whose jobs affect patient care should cast off the cloak of conscience when patients' needs demand it. ~ NEJM, Mar 25