Advertisement

Corrigendum to position statement: Political interference in sexual and reproductive health research and health professional education [Nursing Outlook 65/2 (2017) 242–245]

      The authors regret that the printed version of the above article contained a number of errors. The correct and final version follows. The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Nursing Outlook
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

      1. 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure, American Association of University Professors and of the Association of American Colleges.

        • American Academy of Nursing
        Press release: American Academy of Nursing applauds U.S. Supreme Court decision on Texas abortion access law.
        2015 (6/27/2016. Retrieved from)
      2. American Association of University Professors, Academic Freedom Principles and Regulations. Retrieved from https://www.aaup.org/report/recommended-institutional-regulations-academic-freedom-and-tenure

        • Barry D.
        • Friedman A.D.
        • Lipton-Lubet S.
        Changing the conversation on abortion restrictions: A proactive response to political interference in healthcare.
        National Partnership for Women and Families, Washington DC2015 (Retrieved from http://www.nationalpartnership.org/research-library/changing-the-conversation-a-proactive-response-to-political-interference-in-health-care.pdf)
        • Berg J.A.
        • Olshansky E.
        • Shaver J.
        • Taylor D.
        • Woods N.F.
        Women’s health in jeopardy: Failure to curb unintended pregnancies: A statement of the women’s health expert panel.
        Nursing Outlook. 2012; 60: 163-164
        • Berg J.A.
        • Taylor D.
        • Woods N.F.
        Where we are today: Prioritizing women’s health services and health policy. A report by the Women's Health Expert Panel of the American Academy of Nursing.
        Nursing Outlook. 2013; 61: 5-15
        • Berg J.A.
        • Shaver J.
        • Olshansky E.
        • Woods N.F.
        • Taylor D.
        A call to action: Expanded research agenda for women's health.
        Nursing Outlook. 2013; 61: 252
        • Berkowitz B.
        Examining what’s at stake: The supreme court, nurses and abortion care provision.
        The Huffington Post, 2016 (Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bobbie-berkowitz/examining-whats-at-stake_b_9293684.html)
      3. Coalition to Protect the Provider-Patient Relationship. Retrieved from http://www.coalitiontoprotect.org/?referrer=http://www.coalitiontoprotect.org/

      4. Federal Register (2016). Compliance with Title X requirements by project recipients in selecting subrecipients, DHHS Rules, 1/19/2016. Retrieved from https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/12/19/2016-30276/compliance-with-title-x-requirements-by-project-recipients-in-selecting-subrecipients

      5. National Physicians Alliance, American Academy of Nursing, Center for American Progress DBA Doctors for America, American Nurses Association, Society for Adolescent Health & Medicine (2016). Brief of Amici Curiae in support of petitioners (Whole Women’s Healthcare) in the U.S. Supreme Court case No. 15–274. Retrieved from https://www.reproductiverights.org/sites/crr.civicactions.net/files/documents/National%20Physicians%20Alliance%20Skadden.pdf

      6. Euben DR (2002). Academic freedom of professors and American Association of University Professors. Retrieved from https://www.aaup.org/issues/academic-freedom/professors-and-institutions

      7. Johns Hopkins University, Academic freedom at Johns Hopkins. Web.jhu.edu-academic freedom at Johns Hopkins Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom.

        • Kingkade T.
        Missouri lawmaker seeks to block students from studying restrictive abortion law.
        Huffington Post, 2015 (Retrieved from)
        • National Partnership for Women and Families
        Politics in the exam room: a growing threat.
        Author, Washington DC2015 (Retrieved from)
      8. Taylor, D, McLemore MR, Burton, CW, Olshansky, E, Berg, J, Levi, AJ, Woods, NF & Shattell, M. Missouri shreds academic freedom. Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mona-shattell/missouri-shreds-academic-_b_8555628.html

      9. University of California. General University Policy Regarding Academic Appointees: The Faculty Code of Conduct. Part I – Professional Rights of Faculty. APM – 015. Accessed 08/21/16.

      10. The University of California (UC) statement on Academic Freedomvii emphasizes the role of academic freedom in protecting freedom of inquiry and research, freedom of teaching, and freedom of expression and publication as a basis for the university’s ability to advance knowledge and transmit it effectively to students and to the public. In the UC System, academic freedom is defined as fostering a mature independence of mind in students.

      11. University of Chicago Freedom of Expression Committee, 2015. Retrieved from http://provost.uchicago.edu/sites/default/files/documents/reports/FOECommitteeReport.pdf.

      12. Recognizing ‘nationwide events that have tested institutional commitments to free and open discourse,’ the University of Chicago formed The Committee on Freedom of Expression to draft principles that articulate “the University’s overarching commitment to free, robust, and uninhibited debate and deliberation among all members of the University’s community.”vii

      13. In 2015, the University of Chicago clarified its commitment to promote and protect free expression: members of the university community must act in conformity with the principle of free expression; members of the university community may contest views expressed on campus (or by invited campus guests); members of the university may not obstruct or otherwise interfere with the freedom of others to express views they reject or loathe.

      14. University of Michigan Faculty Handbook, 1.C. Senate Assembly Statement on Academic Freedom. Retrieved from https://www.provost.umich.edu/facultyhandbook/1/1.C.html.

      15. The University of Michigan Faculty Handbook emphasizes the influence of the normative structure of disciplines and professions as a basis for faculty practicing their scholarly profession. Michigan further asserts that academic freedom exists “independent of any external protection … as a basic prerequisite for universities to fulfill their mission,” a professional prerequisite of faculty members as a group. Michigan views academic freedom as including freedom of research and publication; freedom of teaching; freedom of internal criticism; and freedom of participation in public debate.

      16. University of Washington Faculty Code, Section 24–33, “A Statement of Principle: Academic Freedom and Responsibility” Approved by: Senate Executive Committee October 7, 2013; Faculty Senate October 24, 2013; Senate Executive Committee November 18, 2013; Faculty Senate December 5, 2013; Certified by Jack Lee, Chair, Faculty Senate 1/9/2014; President Michael Young January 8, 2014.

      17. The University of Washington Faculty Code is extensive and specific in stipulating the responsibilities and rights of students, faculty members, administrators, and trustees related to academic freedom and the right to speak or write without institutional discipline or restraint on matters of public concern and matters related to shared governance and the general welfare of the University.

        • Wilson T.
        University of Missouri cancels Planned Parenthood contract after legislative hearings.
        2015 (Rewire, Sep 21, 2015. Retrieved from)
        • Wilson T.
        Under pressure from anti-choice lawmakers, University of Missouri ends admitting privilege.
        2015 (Rewire, 9/28/15. Retrieved from)

      Linked Article