The Bush Administration wants any recipient of federal money given through the Department of Health and Human Services to sign a certification that they will not refuse to hire nurses or other healthcare providers who morally object to abortion or even certain forms of birth control, perhaps including the pill and emergency contraception like Plan B.
The plan would cover hospitals, clinics, researchers, medical schools, and state and local governments. The department's proposal said federal money must not "support morally coercive or discriminatory practices or policies in violation of federal law," which it says ensures that doctors, hospitals, and health plans cannot be forced to preform abortions. For more, including how it could impact rape victims, read more.
Some worry that the proposal defines abortion to include other forms of birth control. And the proposal does express concern over state laws that require hospitals to provide emergency contraception to rape victims.
Is refusing to hire healthcare professionals who won't perform legal procedures based on moral or religious grounds for discrimination or effective management? Either way perhaps the Bush Administration should narrow the objections permitted, so disadvantaged woman who rely on government health services have wide access to contraception.
Urban Outfitters
What other job could a person get if they refused to do part of it?
1I have many friends who work in hospitals and this is the first time I've ever heard of discrimination against pro-lifers. First, because people who work in hospitals have bigger problems to worry about and second because it's a political issue not a medical one. A pro-life medical worker will still have to do abortions if they're assigned to do so or they'll get fired. This just seems like overkill.
2Has there ever been an instance where a medical worker has refused to perform a procedure based on such a belief? I would be interested to know what prompted this legislation. I would assume that someone who is opposed to, say, emergency contraception would choose to work in a part of the hospital such as a children's ward or something instead of in the ER where they may encounter rape vicitims. (???)
3If we’re so worried about protecting ‘pro-life’ sensibilities and moral convictions, then the document should also include ensuring that proper medical care and life saving procedures, including transplant, are not denied any patient under the deeply moral person’s care.
4You can’t be pro-life and be a party to allowing a person to remain ill or even die because they can’t afford medical care - that would be immoral and certainly against my religious values.
I really don't think it is a doctors or nurses job to subject a patient to their moral or religious beliefs. So why is this even an issue? Unless Bush want hospitals to to hire people with these kind of beliefs to discourage a person to get an abortion or recieve birth control.
5*from getting an abortion
sorry
6Steph, I'm kind of confused about your post. I mean, I get what you're saying, but how is one exclusive of the other? (being anti-abortion/pro-life and and thinking that proper procedures should not be denied)
I am not trying to be facetious, I am seriously asking.
7MartiniLush, I used to volunteer at a womens health clinic and I have heard horror stories of nurses telling their patients that they will go to hell if they don't have their baby. It's sad but true.
8I don't think anyone is truly pro-life if they are pro-war, pro-death penalty, pro-health-care-is-a-privilege-not-a-right.
9If you support life, you support sustaining life after birth and you don't support the intentional risking or taking anyone's life. Otherwise, to me, you're just against abortion.
Thats an interesting tshirt. I'd never wear it, but its a powerful graphic.
10I think I mentioned this in another post, but Steph maybe you could speak to this.
If your logic is right, then wouldn't it be equally as logical then to assume that people who are pro-choice therefore have no consideration of life and therefore those same people who are usually the same people who rally for the sactity of life against the death penalty or in the case of criminals, are equally as hypocritical?
11sigh...I don't necessarily have a big problem with this...except of course if they try to push their beliefs on patients. I understand protecting the pro-lifers from discrimination...but what about protecting the patients from discrimination?
12"Has there ever been an instance where a medical worker has refused to perform a procedure based on such a belief?"
There have been many pharmacists who have denied birth control and the morning after pill to women (with prescriptions from their doctors who actually know their medical history...unlike the pharmacist).
Some states allow the stores to fire these people. Some states protect the pharmacists for their refusal to dispence prescribed medication.
13It don't believe that abortion is murder, Cabaker. I think that's sort of an inflammatory remark and I don't think those who want to keep abortion legal are murderers.
14"What other job could a person get if they refused to do part of it?"
Good question.
I have heard that in Minnesota, some taxi drivers do not want to carry passengers that have alcohol in their possession, or recently drank it. There are legal issues about whether they can fire the taxi drivers.
15No I'm trying to instigate seriously, I just find it interesting that if one is against abortion on those grounds then they must be against a whole host of other things or else they are considered hypocritical. If thats the case, then it should work the opposite way no?
16hahah err opps, I meant NOT trying to instigate.... freudian slip!
17I have no idea what good this funding condition will do for anyone. Are medical professionals being denied jobs because of this? Where is this coming from?
18I didn't say anyone had no consideration for life, but I do say we all seem to be willing to make exceptions to a truly pro-life stance - so yes, a pro-choice person who proclaims the sanctity of life only when they are talking about the death penalty is as hypocritical as someone who opposes abortion but believes killing our enemies is okay.
19And I think this document would improperly favor one point of view over others.
I wonder if it says anywhere in the document that someone CAN be fired for pushing their beliefs on a patient.
20Cabaker: I loves me some Platonic universalities when it comes to logic, so normally I'm on your team. I think though when it comes to abortion pro-lifers are, in their minds, defending the sanctity of "life", so the extension of that argument is that they should defend "all life". The extension of pro-choice is to defend choice, in my opinion, not the right for someone to terminate a pregnancy.
I hate abortion arguments because they are so tied into religion and science and deeply personal choices. I'll bet everyone on this site has a story about abortion which is why these threads get so heated so quickly.
21Jimmy's here to lighten it up.
"I used to volunteer at a womens health clinic and I have heard horror stories of nurses telling their patients that they will go to hell if they don't have their baby." Wow, Gitsie, I had no idea! That is an awful thing to do to someone.
22The article doesn't mention what led to this document and without knowing of anyone whose rights have somehow been violated by working in a hospital or clinic, I wonder if this is less a response to something and more a signal to start objecting. Since groups have had some success in having pharmacists objecting to dispensing birth control and such, are they now trying to expand their movement?
23That's the thing...where do you draw the line? If you allow medical professionals to not have to participate in abortions...how long until you have to hire someone who refuses to even hand out condoms? It's a slippery slope.
24Does anyone watch the L word? They did that to Pam Grier's character when she was going to have an abortion.
25I do believe that doctors have that personal choice to not go through with the procedure but they should ALWAYS refer the patient to a doctor who will.
26If groups have had some success in having pharmacists objecting to dispensing birth control, then aren't those the cases that have led up to it? Maybe those people were fired or even threatened to be fired and thats what led to this.
Though yes, I can't think of one I've heard of off hand.
Oh and Rac I see what you're saying, this is issue is pretty deep and not easily summed up within the confines of a comment box!
27I am just confused by this whole thing. First of all, if the medical personnel have a moral or religious objection to a certain procedure/medication/whatever, why would they put themselves in a situation that would force them to confront that very thing? Second...while this is supposedly insuring the rights of medical personnel who don't want to perform abortions or hand out birth control - what about the rights of the patients? Who insures their rights to get legal procedures/medications?
28"If groups have had some success in having pharmacists objecting to dispensing birth control, then aren't those the cases that have led up to it? Maybe those people were fired or even threatened to be fired and thats what led to this."
That is possible, however, I don't see how legally a patient that is PRESCRIBED medication by her doctor can then have her medicine withheld by a person who doesn't know her medical history or the reasons for needing the medication. A pharmacist doesn't diagnose, they fill orders.
In most jobs, if there are certain requirements that are needed they tell you ahead of time (lifting heavy things, wearing orange micro-shorts, etc). If it is a job requirement, and you object to it, you should find a different job where you won't be expected to perform these duties.
There are PLENTY of fields in the medical profession that have nothing to do with enabling or withholding reproductive rights.
29But I never heard of a pharmacist being fired Cab, only of patients having to go to other drug stores.
30Yea thats what I mean, I haven't heard of it either. But patients have had to go to a different drug store? There is only 1 pharmacist at every drug store?
I dunno, I think its BS to refuse to give it. This legislation I'm sure is more to make a point than to do anything effective.
31"This legislation I'm sure is more to make a point than to do anything effective."
Probably!
I have to go off for a moment...is anyone else a little disturbed by how the pill is being treated like contraband anymore? I have had so many issues getting it during recent years (the insurance company saying it is too early...acting like they don't know that a "month" means only 28 days!). Last month I had to go on a camping trip, and so I needed a pack early because otherwise bears and mountain lions would attack me because of the timing.
The
insurance company wouldn't give it to me until 1 DAY before I needed it...at which time I would be in the middle of nowhere in the mountains.
It isn't like I can crush up the pill and snort it for a high. You can't freebase it. It is just hormones to regulate my girliness! Stop treating me like I am trying to buy crack!!!!
32Done.
Women should always have a choice because each situation is different. And I agree with you MartiniLush.
"if the medical personnel have a moral or religious objection to a certain procedure/medication/whatever, why would they put themselves in a situation that would force them to confront that very thing?"
They are complicating things more, including the time limit, when the patient has a speedy need for assistance.
33Well how do they know you aren't selling your pills to pure high school girls? And why do you need to regulate your girliness (beyond of course shaving your legs, controlling your eyebrows and highlighting those girly assets put upon you so that a man might find you pleasing to his eyes)?
34I just read on a pro-choice blog that HHS has proposed defining contraception as abortion - which tied with this, suggests there's something ugly afoot.
But I wouldn't make a big deal of it until I read it somewhere other than a prochoice blog.
35Jill I've had those problems and that same thought myself! One time I got so pissed off that finally I just said to the Doctor, "So when I get pregnant because you denied me this, are you going to pay all my bills and raise the child?".... it was not a happy day! But I did end up getting them. I mean come on! Its not oxycontin!
Why would anyone buy them to sell them to girls? Can't they just go to planned parenthood?
BTW, what is HHS?
36"I mean come on! Its not oxycontin!"
I have said this exact same thing!!! Hysterical!!
I know you are playing devil's advocate Stephley, but some people really don't understand that sometimes a person's "girliness" has to be regulated! When I was younger, I wouldn't get the girliness except for 2-4 times a year...and then it went on forever once it started. Pills stopped the insanity!
37I start to get riled up about this topic sometimes, and then I remember that sex is just really really popular. Our pills aren't going anywhere, as well as our right to choose. people will make things hard, but what's new? that's life.
38I had the same problem with my bc once! With me, it was my insurance, like for Jill.
I went to a Catholic college and the health center could send your prescriptions out for you in case you didn't have a car or whatnot, and their was a big to-do made over people getting birth control prescriptions filled. It was allowed, because people can be on birth control for "medical reasons," but some people made a stink over it.
39Health and Human Services.
40The pill made me break out horribly - if I had stayed on it, I could have been Queen of the Purity Ball by default.
I love the pill! Its the best thing ever, Jill I had the opposite problem as you, I would never get my girliness! The pill straightened that right out!
all hail the pill!
41God bless the pill!
42I mean I wouldn't get it period.... awww bad joke!
tsk tsk to me, but really it
wouldn't come at all and some other things were going wrong so it was a big ol mess!
People need to realize there are many more benefits to taking the pill besides not getting pregnant.
Gee I wonder where Rac went???
43on a personal note related to abortion, it makes me CRAZY to hear of stories of couples who can't conceive, and they spend thousands for in vitro, or for a surrogate, etc. There are so many kids out there whose life you can change through adoption. I'm a spiritual Christian, and frankly if I couldn't conceive I'd consider it part of God's plan. I'd start thinking, "hmm, maybe there's another option for me. or maybe I'm supposed to influence a child's life in a better way." ie, adoption. Of course that goes back to the whole notion regarding abortion anyway, that it's none of my business to tell anyone what to do with their body, or whether or not they should adpot. so here we are, back where we started. none of my business. but that's my opinion!
44no kris i've though the same way many times!
45"People need to realize there are many more benefits to taking the pill besides not getting pregnant."
So true!!!!!!!
46Adoption is a BEAUTIFUL thing!
47Dave Thomas was adopted and was a huge adoption advocate his whole life. I heard him speak about it once and the stories he told made me tear up.
48And I do agree, Kris, that adoption should be the way to go for those who cannot have children on their own. Of course, I don't think we should stop people from getting in vitro, etc. But, I do think that we should encourage adoption as much as possible. I've known a few foster families and all of the kids always had so much to offer! The days they found their "forever homes" were always so amazing.
49Wow, what is with the issues with insurance and getting the pill? I must say I am fortunate and have never had such problems - and I get them early, so I can throw away the "placebo" pills and just start the next month - and only get my "girliness" 3 times a year! I am a much happier person since I can do this!
50Post New Comment
Please share your opinion with our community, but make sure it is on topic and follows our Community Rules. We moderate comments and prohibit personal attacks, threats, spam, lewd images, or the promotion of your personal website.