Introduction:

Conscientious objection (CO) can generate a conflict for health professionals on issues such as voluntary interruption of pregnancy (IVE).

Objective:

To analyze the arguments in the scientific evidence for CO in IVE.

Method:

Integrative literary review in six stages, obtained from the MEDLINE/PUBMED, ISI Web of Science, LILACS, and SciELO databases published between 2018-2022 in English, Portuguese, and Spanish, adjusted to PRISMA requirements. Data were summarized using thematic analysis.

Results:

From 55 texts, 25 were analyzed. 32% of the publications were made in 2020, 36% are critical analyses of the literature, 24% were made in Chile, and 32% were obtained from PUBMED. Three categories of work are accepted: 1. Characteristics of the CO. How does CO affect public health? 2. The advisability of proceeding to a regulation of the exercise of the CO.3. CO challenges.

Conclusions:

The aspects that support professional attitudes are problematized, insisting that, although the law recognizes the exercise of CO in the health field, it is necessary to articulate bidirectional protection; in this way, CO is legitimized and acquires coherence, ensuring the right to health of women. Thus, his argument resides in the understanding that the main commitment of health teams is the well-being of women's sexual and reproductive health in all contexts.

        · |     · | |     · ( pdf ) | ( pdf )