Wednesday, October 8, 2008

Roe'd right up the river by the courts

A recent court case got me just fuming. In Oceanside, California, a court ruled that a doctor can not refuse to do a procedure based on religious objection. The specific case involved a lesbian couple who went to a fertility doctor for artificial insemination. When he refused based on his religious background they sued stating that he discriminated against them. This is on top of a case where a transexual sued because a hospital would not approve them to have breast augmentation in their religious charity hospital.

I cant but wonder how long it will be before people sue Catholic Hospitals because they wont do tubals or some patient comes into the ER in labor and demands that the ER doc or OB perform an abortion and sues the religiosly objecting doctor. I guess in America, there is freedom of religion unless you are a doctor.


SnowLite said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
SeaSpray said...

Interesting posts Throckmorton.

I've been meaning to tell you I like the titles to your posts. :)

I want to comment, but I've gotta leave soon.

Big day, busy day and probably emotional day today... but hopefully the first step toward better things.

I know I've said this before...and if you wanted to you would... but I know if you put yourself out into the med blogasphere...fellow med bloggers would follow your Throckmorton name/link back here... and enjoy/comment in your blog. You write interesting posts.. often thought provoking and/or humorous too. I'm just sayin... :)

SeaSpray said...

Wow! That is infuriating!

Discrimination IS wrong!

But the difference here is that the doctor was being discriminated against!

(Ok too many exclamation points-bugs me too!)

A true religious conviction runs deeper within the individual than even the law does. I can only speak for the Judeo-Christian faith which expects that you will also obey the law, but not harm anyone. (exceptions like defense and protection of people unable to protect themselves) They believe they are honoring God whom they believe to be the ultimate and most important authority to answer to ... which trumps any earthly perceived discrimination. The people are observing what they believe to be the tenets of their faith. It's about convictions that exist because of their faith.

Then to use that logic... the Islamic terrorists have convictions. They thought they were honoring God by flying into buildings and killing innocent people.

Obviously that is against the law.

But then discrimination is against the law... but there are degrees and gray areas.

I suppose it could be looked at that way. But the difference is these people all have choices.

They are forcing their will on the people who are not harming them. I would argue...they are harming the doctor and then also the medical profession because as you so aptly point out...where will it end?

Seriously...these people can choose to go elsewhere. I would NEVER want a doctor who was being FORCED to care for me. Ugh! One of the most important things to me as a patient is to have a physician that I am comfortable with and there is mutual respect between us. I have to have a good rapport in order for me to feel comfortable and trust a doc.

Admittedly... I see a couple of docs who stand out above the others in my mind which I think facilitates care all the more. Why in the world would anyone want a doctor who is being held hostage by them? or was it just about the money and they were awarded a settlement?

I think that doctor's rights were infringed upon! If he didn't..he should've appealed and/or counter sued!

There is this Jewish lawyer (A legal dynamo)...Jay Sekulow (I've seen him on TV) who became a Christian. I think the story is that he attended a Christian college and had intended to disprove the faith and after a lot of research actually converted to that faith. (Interesting bio)Anyway...this guy became so strong in his convictions that he formed ACLJ-American Center for Law and Justice and has taken and argued religious cases to and before the United States Supreme Court and won.That doctor should hire him! I am not sure but I think they argue things for free or some things because he is concerned with the laws of the land and the rights of people of faith being trampled upon, etc. Again..I am not sure of exactly what he does... but I know he is active in that arena.

Regarding a catholic hospital...c'mon! Aren't they exempt up front because of their religious status? I worked in a catholic hospital system. what next they'd have to take crucifixes down because they are offensive? i swear...I think if I were a lawyer...these would be exactly the cases I'd want to argue!

People can choose to go to another facility. Just like turning off the TV.

That couple is practicing REVERSE discrimination!!!!!!!!!

Actually...about doing tubals, etc., in a Catholic hospital... I heard med staff talking about there are ways around that... but I don't recall what now. maybe it was going in to do one surgery but since there...the other got done. maybe that was before everything got so regulated...I don't know.

Don't even get me started about partial birth abortions!

I would be at the front of the line defending that doctor anyway I could.

I am pro-life except in case of rape, incest or life of the mother although for me personally...I would follow through.

I see absolutely NOTHING wrong with birth control though and don't understand if conception hasn't taken place.

I am publishing this without checking as i have to go out and so I hope I haven't offended you.

If you had people coming into your sight from the med blogasphere...this would probably turn into a heated discussion. :)

Very interesting!

SeaSpray said...

Okay...just one more thing(s)...I wrote this in Scalpel's blog in September. Delete it if you want. I may anyway. I am just putting the whole thing in to demonstrate that I know it is a difficult issue...BUT...partial birth my opinion is murder. I honestly can not fathom in a physician could do this. I can not.

"I know about the stay out your uterus concerns and I do understand the frustration and anger because how dare ANYONE tell ME what to do with MY body. But for me... I would feel like I was killing a human being and couldn't live with that. I did not always believe this way. I thought..hey downs baby..isn't amniocentesis can abort. But I didn't really understand what it was all about and then when I learned...I just couldn't think that way anymore. And if there ever had to be a compromise... well I could maybe go along with EARLY abortions (I don't like it)but definitely NOT MID AND LATE TRIMESTER ABORTIONS. caps not intended - sorry. The torture of a saline sad... and the absolute blatant murder of a fully formed and can survive outside the womb baby up to term with a partial birth abortion... oh my God...that sounds like something the Nazis or Islamic terrorists, who had/have so little regard for human life might do. And I do NOT understand how any good doctor who takes the hipppocratic oath could ever do such an evil thing. ???

We had a huge discussion about this in the ED one night and the Ed doc was adamant that a full term baby is NOT a baby until it is delivered. So when the saline fetuses are delivered are they just a dead baby then? I don't understand. And if you do a c-section on a full term woman...will the doctors find a canine, feline, reptile or fish in the uterus because it wasn't born yet? How is it legal to plunge a scalpel in the back of a full term baby to kill it and it isn't murder because the baby ...excuse me...fetus isn't fully born yet?

I honestly do not understand that rationale.

And while I never want to take anyone's rights away...I believe the baby has rights and is too little to defend itself and so someone has to be an advocate for their protection.

And I and other prolife people I know would NEVER condone the lunatic fringe violence of the past where they murdered the doctor or blow up the abortion clinics. That is WRONG!

The whole point is you don't hurt one human being to help another.

And a few years ago when I was 48, I had a most definite pregnancy scare, called my doc who offered a medication that I declined. I was worried because given certain health issues and age, would most definitely have been high risk and I actually wondered if I would die. I am only saying this because I am willing to live what I profess.

I know the argument is that no one has the right to tell a woman what to do with her body.

It is a painful issue..isn't it?"

mercydoc said...

I couldn't agree more!