Should medical personnel be able to refuse to do their job based on religious beliefs

[Immanuel]

No, that is not what it boils down to.

If the doctor has a right not to offer someone legal treatments then it boils down to the need for patients to be informed about which doctors they need to seek out to get the treatment they feel they need.

I'm certainly not talking about forcing the doctor, not demanding that anyone violate their conscience, but if a doctor is going to choose to invoke a conscience exemption, then patients should be informed of this so that they can get treatments in a timely manner.

And how do you propose such information be delivered? Maybe by some kind of a "scarlet letter" type deal? I'm pretty certain that what you mean to say is that medical professionals who don't see things in the "pro-choice" light should be ostracized, but maybe it is the abortionists and those who provide harmful services that should bear the brunt of the nation's wrath?

And, it seems to me that some individuals in this discussion are demanding indentured servitude for any and all with whom they do business.

Immie

It is a reasonable for a citizen who goes to a taxpayer funded emergency facility to assume that they will have access to legal services typically provided by taxpayer funded emergency facilities. If that is not the case, there should be a way to let citizens know where they need to go to get what they are legally allowed.

When a doctor opts out of giving legal services, patients who need the services need to know in a timely manner that they need to seek out a different doctor.

Take the brunt of your wrath and work to make the now-legal services illegal.





[edit: How should this information be given? I don't know. I would hope that taxpayer funded facilities wouldn't stop a rape victim from getting the care she needs. I'm not sure how she should be notified that a facility she and her family pay for won't help her. Maybe the desk clerk can be trained to redirect rape victims to appropriate facilities.]

FYI: if a person goes to a taxpayer funded hospital there are plenty of doctors, RN's etc. etc. etc. and surely someone on staff will provide the services in question. Thus, your complaints are bogus. What you (collectively) are actually saying is that no one has the right to deny you what you want, no one has the right to have an opinion which differs from your own.

I don't believe making "it" illegal will produce the required results; that being a significant reduction in the number of abortions producing an increase in the number of lives saved.

Immie

 

[Truthmatters]

the history of abortion calls you a fool.

The main reason people voted it in was the DEATHS involved in back ally abortions.

learn some history

 

[Immanuel]

the history of abortion calls you a fool.

The main reason people voted it in was the DEATHS involved in back ally abortions.

learn some history

STFU idiot and try reading the entire thread before you attach an enema hose to your rectum and place the other side in your mouth.

Stupid Brainless Bitch.

You couldn't even understand the post you were replying too. Dumb bitch. I stated very clearly that making it illegal would not solve the problem but you are dumber than horse shit and couldn't even figure that out.

Immie

 

[Wry Catcher]

News9.com Videos - News9.com - Oklahoma City, OK - News, Weather, Video and Sports |

Refusing to give a post-rape contraceptive based on religion? I think that lady needs a new job.

Should the government dictate to people how to do their jobs. Should the government force people to violate their religious beliefs?

Yes, the government should dictate to people how to do their jobs. Should a medical professional who believes narcotics are the panacea be allowed to given narcotics to everyone?

Should someone who believes only God can cure disease withhold treatment and pray over the ill patient?

Methinks the Libertarian movement is dominated by morons.

 

[PredFan]

Yes, we healthcare workers shuld be able to refuse our services based on religious beliefs,

And we should be willing to accept the consequences of those actions.

 

[Immanuel]

Yes, we healthcare workers shuld be able to refuse our services based on religious beliefs,

And we should be willing to accept the consequences of those actions.

Agreed. But, those consequences should be dictated by your employers not outside people that want to force you to do their bidding because they believe they have more rights than you do.

Immie

 

[geauxtohell]

If some medical personnel does not want to administer contraception they should be able to say "Hey Jack, come over here and give this girl a plill".

If we can accommodate muslim grocery checkers who won't swipe the bacon we can accommodate religious medical personnel.

If I have to take time away from my patient's to care for another phtsician's patient because he/she refuses a reasonable request based on their religious beliefs, I am going to be pissed.

If it slows the team down, that person shouldn't be a part of the team.

Writing prescriptions isn't a trivial manner. That means I am now responsible for any ill effects of that medication.

I just assumed risk due to someone else's religious belief.

 

[Missourian]

Primum non nocere...or "First, do no harm".

 

[Amelia]

And how do you propose such information be delivered? Maybe by some kind of a "scarlet letter" type deal? I'm pretty certain that what you mean to say is that medical professionals who don't see things in the "pro-choice" light should be ostracized, but maybe it is the abortionists and those who provide harmful services that should bear the brunt of the nation's wrath?

And, it seems to me that some individuals in this discussion are demanding indentured servitude for any and all with whom they do business.

Immie

It is a reasonable for a citizen who goes to a taxpayer funded emergency facility to assume that they will have access to legal services typically provided by taxpayer funded emergency facilities. If that is not the case, there should be a way to let citizens know where they need to go to get what they are legally allowed.

When a doctor opts out of giving legal services, patients who need the services need to know in a timely manner that they need to seek out a different doctor.

Take the brunt of your wrath and work to make the now-legal services illegal.





[edit: How should this information be given? I don't know. I would hope that taxpayer funded facilities wouldn't stop a rape victim from getting the care she needs. I'm not sure how she should be notified that a facility she and her family pay for won't help her. Maybe the desk clerk can be trained to redirect rape victims to appropriate facilities.]

FYI: if a person goes to a taxpayer funded hospital there are plenty of doctors, RN's etc. etc. etc. and surely someone on staff will provide the services in question. Thus, your complaints are bogus. What you (collectively) are actually saying is that no one has the right to deny you what you want, no one has the right to have an opinion which differs from your own.

I don't believe making "it" illegal will produce the required results; that being a significant reduction in the number of abortions producing an increase in the number of lives saved.

Immie

Reasonable people wouldn't walk into an emergency facility expecting illegal treatment.

If there are other people at the publicly-funded facility who can provide the taxpayer with legal treatments then what is this discussion about?

I thought it was about the only staff on hand being unwilling to help save a rape victim from possibly having to face even more traumatic and intrusive procedures later.

 

[gxnelson]

News9.com Videos - News9.com - Oklahoma City, OK - News, Weather, Video and Sports |

Refusing to give a post-rape contraceptive based on religion? I think that lady needs a new job.

Should the government dictate to people how to do their jobs. Should the government force people to violate their religious beliefs?

Should people force their religious beliefs onto others?

 

[BDBoop]

It is a reasonable for a citizen who goes to a taxpayer funded emergency facility to assume that they will have access to legal services typically provided by taxpayer funded emergency facilities. If that is not the case, there should be a way to let citizens know where they need to go to get what they are legally allowed.

When a doctor opts out of giving legal services, patients who need the services need to know in a timely manner that they need to seek out a different doctor.

Take the brunt of your wrath and work to make the now-legal services illegal.





[edit: How should this information be given? I don't know. I would hope that taxpayer funded facilities wouldn't stop a rape victim from getting the care she needs. I'm not sure how she should be notified that a facility she and her family pay for won't help her. Maybe the desk clerk can be trained to redirect rape victims to appropriate facilities.]

FYI: if a person goes to a taxpayer funded hospital there are plenty of doctors, RN's etc. etc. etc. and surely someone on staff will provide the services in question. Thus, your complaints are bogus. What you (collectively) are actually saying is that no one has the right to deny you what you want, no one has the right to have an opinion which differs from your own.

I don't believe making "it" illegal will produce the required results; that being a significant reduction in the number of abortions producing an increase in the number of lives saved.

Immie

Reasonable people wouldn't walk into an emergency facility expecting illegal treatment.

If there are other people at the publicly-funded facility who can provide the taxpayer with legal treatments then what is this discussion about?

I thought it was about the only staff on hand being unwilling to help save a rape victim from possibly having to face even more traumatic and intrusive procedures later.

Well, yes; strangely, we have reached the same conclusion.

 

[PredFan]

If some medical personnel does not want to administer contraception they should be able to say "Hey Jack, come over here and give this girl a plill".

If we can accommodate muslim grocery checkers who won't swipe the bacon we can accommodate religious medical personnel.

yes if not illegal no health care professional has the right to deny service based on their personal morals.'
Should a car wash be allowed to refuse to wash your car because of a Bush sticker on it?

Dead wrong. My health care skills belong to me and me alone. I can chose to rent them to an employer, but I have the right to deny my services, that I worked hard for, to anyone I choose.

That said, I can be fired for not providing those services if that is in the job description that I CHOSE to get paid for.

And yes, a car wash should be allowed to deny their services to anyone.

 

[PredFan]

the history of abortion calls you a fool.

The main reason people voted it in was the DEATHS involved in back ally abortions.

learn some history

STFU idiot and try reading the entire thread before you attach an enema hose to your rectum and place the other side in your mouth.

Stupid Brainless Bitch.

You couldn't even understand the post you were replying too. Dumb bitch. I stated very clearly that making it illegal would not solve the problem but you are dumber than horse shit and couldn't even figure that out.

Immie

Awesome!

 

[PredFan]

News9.com Videos - News9.com - Oklahoma City, OK - News, Weather, Video and Sports |

Refusing to give a post-rape contraceptive based on religion? I think that lady needs a new job.

Should the government dictate to people how to do their jobs. Should the government force people to violate their religious beliefs?

Yes, the government should dictate to people how to do their jobs. Should a medical professional who believes narcotics are the panacea be allowed to given narcotics to everyone?

Should someone who believes only God can cure disease withhold treatment and pray over the ill patient?

Methinks the Libertarian movement is dominated by morons.

Wow! Just....wow.

The disconnect here is astounding.

 

[PredFan]

News9.com Videos - News9.com - Oklahoma City, OK - News, Weather, Video and Sports |

Refusing to give a post-rape contraceptive based on religion? I think that lady needs a new job.

Should the government dictate to people how to do their jobs. Should the government force people to violate their religious beliefs?

Should people force their religious beliefs onto others?

Certainly not but that is not what that person was doing was it?

 

[BDBoop]

Should the government dictate to people how to do their jobs. Should the government force people to violate their religious beliefs?

Should people force their religious beliefs onto others?

Certainly not but that is not what that person was doing was it?

Yes. It was. She refused to give the morning after pill, when faced with a rape victim that she knew was a rape victim, because it was "against her religion."

 

[Wry Catcher]

A young female goes to an emergency room at 0300 and complains of pain and bleeding. Clearly the pregnancy has gone bad in both the patient and Doctors opinion. However, the MD is oppose to abortion under an circumstance.

The patient calls a taxi and is driven to the nearest hospital, 5 miles away. During the ride she dies of exsanguination.

Q. Should the MD be charged with a crime?

Q. As a member of the jury, should the MD be charged and the facts are as stated, how would you find?

Q. As the judge, and if the MD were found guilty of (F) Manslaughter would you send her/him to prison; place him/her on probation with a county jail sentence or before deliberation set aside the finding of the jury?

 

[Immanuel]

Should people force their religious beliefs onto others?

Certainly not but that is not what that person was doing was it?

Yes. It was. She refused to give the morning after pill, when faced with a rape victim that she knew was a rape victim, because it was "against her religion."

However, she was not preventing the victim from getting the services elsewhere. She didn't lock the victim up in a cell for nine months forcing the victim to produce unwanted offspring she simply said that she was unwilling to perform said services and allowed the victim to go to another provider.

The medical provider has that right although it is evident that liberals do not believe in the right of self-governance.

Immie

 

[Immanuel]

A young female goes to an emergency room at 0300 and complains of pain and bleeding. Clearly the pregnancy has gone bad in both the patient and Doctors opinion. However, the MD is oppose to abortion under an circumstance.

The patient calls a taxi and is driven to the nearest hospital, 5 miles away. During the ride she dies of exsanguination.

Q. Should the MD be charged with a crime?

Q. As a member of the jury, should the MD be charged and the facts are as stated, how would you find?

Q. As the judge, and if the MD were found guilty of (F) Manslaughter would you send her/him to prison; place him/her on probation with a county jail sentence or before deliberation set aside the finding of the jury?

No, not guilty, depends on the laws of the state of jurisdiction.

However, it would be the responsibility of the MD to provide life saving services before releasing the patient unless the patient checks herself out against medical advice. Abortions are by no means "life saving services".

Immie

 

[BDBoop]

A young female goes to an emergency room at 0300 and complains of pain and bleeding. Clearly the pregnancy has gone bad in both the patient and Doctors opinion. However, the MD is oppose to abortion under an circumstance.

The patient calls a taxi and is driven to the nearest hospital, 5 miles away. During the ride she dies of exsanguination.

Q. Should the MD be charged with a crime?

Q. As a member of the jury, should the MD be charged and the facts are as stated, how would you find?

Q. As the judge, and if the MD were found guilty of (F) Manslaughter would you send her/him to prison; place him/her on probation with a county jail sentence or before deliberation set aside the finding of the jury?

No, not guilty, depends on the laws of the state of jurisdiction.

However, it would be the responsibility of the MD to provide life saving services before releasing the patient unless the patient checks herself out against medical advice. Abortions are by no means "life saving services".

Immie

Bzzzzt. They are in this case.

Try again.