Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
The U.S. Supreme Court's 2022 ruling in Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization held that the U.S. Constitution does not confer the right to an abortion, which set into motion an overhaul of reproductive health care services in certain states. Health care professionals are now operating within a rapidly changing landscape of clinical practice in which they may experience conflict between personal and professional morals (eg, bodily autonomy, patient advocacy), uncertainty regarding allowable practices, and fear of prosecution (eg, loss of medical license) related to reproductive health care services. The ethical dilemmas stemming from Dobbs create a context for exposure to potentially morally injurious events, moral distress, and moral injury (ie, functional impairment stemming from exposure to moral violations) among health care professionals. Considerations related to clinical intervention and approaches to policy are reviewed. Early identification of health care professionals' potentially morally injurious event exposure related to restricted reproductive services is critical for preventing and intervening on moral injury, with implications for improving functioning and retention within the medical field.
Desai et al. (Wed,) studied this question.