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

[jillian]

In re the medical professional, as stated earlier in this thread and many times before in other such discussions, if they are not willing to perform said duties, it is the employer's decision and no one else, including the victim, who has the right to decide if they are doing the job for which they were hired. The victim does not have the right to demand that the the professional nor his/her employer perform services that they are not willing to do.

Immie

Wrong. This was a public hospital that receives federal funding.

Which, amazingly enough, does NOT mean they don't still have the right, as the employer, to define FOR THEMSELVES what "doing the job" actually means.

You might also want to consider, while you've got your "I'm a taxpayer and I demand abortions!" panties up your ass, that that nurse is ALSO a taxpayer, as are many other religious people. So why is it that YOUR definition of what a public hospital should and shouldn't require automatically trumps THEIRS?

they do NOT have the right to violate medical protocol because of their religious beliefs.

and yes, if they take government funding, they have to live by government rules.

thanks for playing.

always nice to see you poke your ignorant nasty nose in.

 

[Cecilie1200]

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.]

Well, let's see. First of all, she WAS notified in a timely manner that the doctor wasn't going to administer emergency contraception. She was told right then.

Second of all, there apparently WAS another doctor on-call there. The mother SAYS that the doctor refused to refer her daughter to anyone else in the hospital, but I note with interest that the OP's link only bothered to get one side of the story before reporting it.

Third, she DID, eventually, get the emergency contraception somewhere else, which is pretty much what everyone keeps saying. No, people are not obligated to violate their personal beliefs just to keep you from being inconvenienced.

 

[Cecilie1200]

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.

I see so she we extend this to all jobs? "Hey you know what serving you cow is against my beliefs because I am a vegetarian therefor you can't have anything on the menu and dont bother complaining to my manager because we just made it so I cant get fired for not doing my job"

Y'ever see Hindus working in McDonald's? No? Try to consider that everyone in the world isn't an ignoramus like you. Then consider that just because YOU consider abortions and emergency contraception to be essential aspects of being a doctor doesn't mean everyone does, and no one died and made you God at any time I'm aware of.

Putz.

 

[Cecilie1200]

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

Voted it in? VOTED IT IN?! NO ONE "VOTED IN" ABORTION, YOU PISS-POOR EXCUSE FOR A HUMAN BEING!

Congratulations. You have finally managed to become too stupid to breathe without instructions.

 

[Cecilie1200]

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

What do you want from someone who thinks "people voted in" abortion?

 

[Cecilie1200]

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?

Who's "forcing their religious beliefs onto others"? You see anyone FORCING someone to act in accordance with their religious beliefs?

FYI, refusing to participate in someone else's actions is not "forcing your beliefs onto" her. Insisting that someone do something they don't agree with IS forcing your beliefs onto her.

 

[Cecilie1200]

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.

I believe your own link said that there WAS an on-call doctor available. And I'm sure you never even noticed how much stuff that "news cast" left out . . . you know, like the other side of the story. Hey, it validated YOUR worldview and allowed you to feel self-righteous and outraged, so it MUST have been gospel truth, right?

 

[Cecilie1200]

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."

Amazingly enough, simply having and acting on one's beliefs in a place where you have to be aware they exist is NOT forcing one's beliefs on you. We all realize that you think the law should require anyone who disagrees with you to never, EVER be allowed to say so out loud, but that doesn't make it reality.

And shockingly, no one gives a shit if it makes you feel bad or not. Deal with it.

 

[uscitizen]

and forced to bear the child of the rapist....do you think that would make it hard to love that child?

Only to people who are fucked in the head and can't view children as separate individuals from their parents.

If you end up hating and despising your husband, do you hate and despise the children you had with him because of it? That's messed up.

But having to carry to term a child because you were raped?

Now this could make you hate the child.
Could very likely cause all kinds of problems....

You are being an ass in this thread.

 

[Cecilie1200]

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.

Oh? She was going to die without that emergency contraception, was she? Her life was in imminent danger, was it?

Do explain.

Note: I did notice afterward that we had stopped talking about the real world, as at least partly represented in the OP, and descended in to "Insane Liberal Impossibilities Land" as proposed by an idiot I have on ignore. I do apologize for not noticing the shift sooner.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Bzzzzt. They are in this case.

Try again.

Bzzzzt wrong. The victim wasn't in any danger. The only individual in danger is the innocent product of the rape.

I'd tell you to try again, but it is obvious that once again you would fail.

Immie

Oh, I'm sorry. I hadn't realized you can't read.

Carry on.

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 any circumstances.

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

Ohh, I hadn't realized that we were back in stupid, never-happen-in-this-reality-but-let's-base-public-policy-on-it-anyway hypothetical land. For some reason, I thought we were still in the real world.

Carry on. For the record, I also think that if green aliens from Mars invaded the emergency room and kidnapped the doctor and she exsanguinated while waiting for them to finish probing his anus and return him, the aliens should be charged, too.

 

[Cecilie1200]

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."

That isn't forcing her religion on the person. It is practicing her religion. There's a difference. Why the hospital didn't just find another person to give the pill is beyond me.

Well, since the "news cast" mysteriously neglected to even contact the hospital for a comment - judging by the fact that they didn't say, "We contacted the hospital, but they declined to comment", much less actually show anyone telling the doctor's side of the story - and judging by the mother's attitude problem, I'm guessing that when she was told that the doctor wouldn't administer the emergency contraception "because of her beliefs ::gasp!::", she just gathered her daughter up and went storming out to another medical facility in high dudgeon.

She claims the doctor refused to refer them to another doctor there, but without proof of that fact, I highly doubt it.

 

[Cecilie1200]

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

Please don't restate the questions. The facts as given are hypocthetical and don't require explanations or spin. She was bleeding, she was pregnant and the MD knew the preganancy had gone bad. I could spin the question by stating God made the preganacy go bad so the MD was not violating his/her oath or the law.

But this would never ever happen. unless the doctor was bat shit crazy, but then no nurse worth her pay would allow the doctor to release her. No nurse, no nurse practitioner, no charge nurse or nurse administrator either.

So in order for your hypothetical to work, it has to be changed, and even then it fails.

Have you ever in your life heard of a doctor - or ANYONE, for that matter - who "didn't believe in abortion under any circumstances" to the point of refusing to remove ectopic pregnancies, or pregnancies where the fetus has died, or to deal with any other pregnancies where there's no hope of saving the child?

Stupid shit hypotheticals based on circumstances and people who simply don't and won't exist are not worth dignifying with an answer.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I'd fire an employee who refused to do their job on the spot. They should have thought this out before they accepted the position. Keep your holy roller crap out of the workplace.

Since you're NOT the employer, keep YOUR meddlesome liberal crap out of OTHER PEOPLE'S workplace.

 

[Cecilie1200]

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?

I agree, a Jehovah's Witness should never perform a blood transfusion even if it would save the patient's life.

And Martians should be arrested for invading emergency rooms.

 

[uscitizen]

Meltdown in progress.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Wrong. This was a public hospital that receives federal funding.

Which, amazingly enough, does NOT mean they don't still have the right, as the employer, to define FOR THEMSELVES what "doing the job" actually means.

You might also want to consider, while you've got your "I'm a taxpayer and I demand abortions!" panties up your ass, that that nurse is ALSO a taxpayer, as are many other religious people. So why is it that YOUR definition of what a public hospital should and shouldn't require automatically trumps THEIRS?

they do NOT have the right to violate medical protocol because of their religious beliefs.

and yes, if they take government funding, they have to live by government rules.

thanks for playing.

always nice to see you poke your ignorant nasty nose in.

In other news, "medical protocol" is NOT defined as "What Jillian thinks doctors should do".

And no, the government has no business making rules about people's religious beliefs. I'm fairly certain that's written down somewhere . . . some old document of some sort, I think?

Always unpleasant to see you poke your ignorant nasty nose in. And unnecessary, since you never have anything original to say.

 

[BDBoop]

Meltdown in progress.

Holy, no doubt. Line upon gray line. Too funny.

 

[frazzledgear]

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.

You one of those people who claims to believe in religious freedom but when it comes to actually living in accordance with their religious beliefs you don't? Religious freedom doesn't just mean the freedom to have personal beliefs -but to actually live their life in accordance with those beliefs. Otherwise a pretty useless right, isn't it. Still don't get that? Freedom actually means something and it isn't "you must leave your religious beliefs at the door and always do what I want instead!" Your doctor won't provide some service because doing so violates his/her religious beliefs, find another for whom it doesn't. Wow, that was tough.

You don't OWN other people. No doctor becomes YOUR slave just because they chose a career in medicine! You have no right to force them to forfeit their own rights, theirs are never subservient or secondary to your own. The fact he/she is a doctor makes zero difference. You have the right to live your life in accordance with YOUR religious or lack of religious beliefs -but that doesn't come with a right to force others to forfeit theirs just because your own are different. A physician owns his/her own medical skills and if doing some procedure violates their religious beliefs and they refuse to perform that procedure-tough. Get another doctor.

 

[koshergrl]

For some jobs, upon being hired, you sign an agreement that you will not desert your post, essentially, no matter what the circumstances.

For example, nurses can be criminally charged if they leave the floor before a replacement is on deck. I know I've worked in places (a jail, residential detention, residential treatment) where you would be held criminally negligent, or worse, if you leave before your replacement has arrived. You can't just "walk off". I imagine ER docs are subject to the same sort of thing...they can't just withhold life-saving treatment based on their religious belief.

I'll have to ask my niece...she's an ER doc...