You are here

Article Text

Article menu

Download PDFPDF

Letter to the editor
Response to ’The FSRH guideline on conscientious objection disrespects patient rights and endangers their health'
Free
  1. Jane Hatfield,
  2. Asha Kasliwal
  1. Faculty of Sexual & Reproductive Healthcare, London, UK
  1. Correspondence to Jane Hatfield, Faculty of Sexual and Reproductive Healthcare, London NW1 4RG, UK; ChiefExec{at}fsrh.org

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjsrh-2018-200103

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    We are grateful that the authors of this letter1 have taken the time to critique the guideline2 published recently by the Faculty of Sexual & Reproductive Healthcare (FSRH) on personal beliefs for those undertaking Faculty qualifications. One of the lessons we have learned over the last 2 years of discussing this issue with our members is that it deserves to be debated far more openly than is currently the case in the UK. We hope that correspondence and debate about the guidelines in BMJ SRH will encourage this.

    The first point we would make is that the authors' letter1 appears to be based on a misunderstanding of the role of the FSRH. The Faculty is not a regulatory body. We have no power or right "to impose necessary sanctions such as termination of employment, demotion, or loss of licence". We are a charity providing training and education …

    View Full Text