Singling Out the Double Effect - Sexual Health Advice & Contraception Are Ethically Distinct

This article is a response to an article previously published in LJPC, which employed the doctrine of double effect to explain the Gillick judgement and exculpate health care workers who provide contraceptives and sexual health advice to under-16s. In this analysis, the two acts: provision of contraceptives and provision of sexual health advice are examined separately against the four criteria of the doctrine of double effect. In conclusion, whilst sexual health advice provision fits into the doctrine reasonably well, in the case of contraceptive provision, the validity of the doctrine of double effect is more doubtful...

• Whilst sexual health advice provision fits into the doctrine of double effect reasonably well, in the case of contraceptive provision, the validity of the doctrine of double effect is more doubtful.
• Some health care workers will not agree that the provision of contraception is a morally neutral act.
• The benefits of sexually transmitted disease and pregnancy prevention cannot be realised unless underage sex actually occurs.
• Prevention of pregnancy is implicitly counted as a benefit. However, in and of itself, pregnancy is not a harm...

Full article at:  http://goo.gl/amsS2L

By:  Steven Bow a , *

^aPublic Health Department, London Borough of Richmond upon Thames, Twickenham, UK

Email: ku.vog.dnomhcir@wob.nevets

 

More at:  https://twitter.com/hiv_insight

And: http://twitter.com/Prison_Health