Within a consequentialist framework, Steve Clarke opposes the complete exclusion of conscientious objection (CO) rights from medical professional duties. More specifically, he proposes a compromise to reduce the practical and moral costs of direct doctor–patient conflict: a system of region-based, regularly updated registers listing clinicians who do not object to specified CO-permissible procedures, together with a recommendation that patients (or referring clinicians) consult this information in advance. In doing so, the system aims to limit harms associated with referrals and in-person refusals across many clinical encounters.
I endorse Clarke’s efforts to refocus the argument away from competing rights claims and towards an assessment of overall implications. I contend that the implementation of registration systems inside multidisciplinary…