Trump Admin Will Protect Health Workers Who Refuse Services On Religious Grounds

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

11 minutes ago, bcking said:

You mean publicly say you don't perform abortions and get business for patients who agree with you? You're probably right, it would likely increase your business from a certain clientele.

 

While I don't share their beliefs, if I was anti-abortion I would still preferably look for an OB based on their skill, ability, reputation, bedside manner and less on whether they would perform that procedure for others. But some people may put that top of their list.

 

No abortions > Technically skilled obstetrician, I guess.

I mean around here in a very Southern Baptist place, I am sure people would go for that

 

People use to say about last football coach at UGA. Ohh but he is a good christian man.  No doubt he is 

 I would reply but if you are having open heart surgery would you rather have a good decent man, or a lying, cussing, whisky drinking reprobate, who is the best cardiovascular surgeon in the nation 

[bcking 3,157]

25 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

I mean around here in a very Southern Baptist place, I am sure people would go for that

 

People use to say about last football coach at UGA. Ohh but he is a good christian man.  No doubt he is 

 I would reply but if you are having open heart surgery would you rather have a good decent man, or a lying, cussing, whisky drinking reprobate, who is the best cardiovascular surgeon in the nation 

Only adjective I would want more info on is whiskey drinking (alcoholic?). Otherwise I'd take him over the nice guy. If he has the objective outcomes data to back up his status, I don't care.

 

I'd be under general for the majority of our interactions.

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

1 hour ago, bcking said:

Only adjective I would want more info on is whiskey drinking (alcoholic?). Otherwise I'd take him over the nice guy. If he has the objective outcomes data to back up his status, I don't care.

 

I'd be under general for the majority of our interactions.

Of course I was not implying substance abuse while operating . Use to be a cardiovascular surgeon in Atl back in the 60s 80s era. Had a big ranch out in my neck of the woods. Tobacco chewing , cussing kind of guy. You would think he was just a pulpwood redneck to meet him. Regarded as one of the best in the nation.  Med school classmate of my dad's.  The doctors back in the day were a different breed. 

[TBoneTX 45,292]

8 hours ago, bcking said:

I'd be under general for the majority of our interactions.

Oh Lord, imagine facing your median sternotomy if you weren't...

[jg121783 3,915]

I wonder if health care workers that don't want to preform a pap smear on a man will be protected.

[bcking 3,157]

4 hours ago, TBoneTX said:

Oh Lord, imagine facing your median sternotomy if you weren't...

There have been some cases of people paralyzed but not properly sedated. So awake but can't move and say anything.

 

At least the patients have claimed that they remember. It is probably a bit more complicated. Even under paralysis you would likely have significant vital sign changes if you truly were "awake". Not sure how an Anesthesiologist would ignore that.

 

But yes - I honestly don't care what a surgeon says or does. They are often unprofessional. If their outcomes justify their skill, I don't care.

[MacUK 983]

16 hours ago, smilesammich said:

no one is going to bleed out and die if they can't get a cashier to ring up their bacon.

The cashier might....

 

Bacon is important!

 

I can't help wondering where the line between religeous freedom and personal freedoms will agree. So far there doesn't seem to be any way to reconcile the two.

 

What's next?

A doctor refusing to treat a pregnant woman who is unmarried?

Refusing to treat an STD if the patient is unmarried?

An emergency room doctor refusing to treat homosexuals?

Refusing to treat patients for incidents resulting from alcohol/drugs?

Refusing to treat atheists/adulterers/sinners?

[bcking 3,157]

10 minutes ago, MacUK said:

The cashier might....

 

Bacon is important!

 

I can't help wondering where the line between religeous freedom and personal freedoms will agree. So far there doesn't seem to be any way to reconcile the two.

 

What's next?

A doctor refusing to treat a pregnant woman who is unmarried?

Refusing to treat an STD if the patient is unmarried?

An emergency room doctor refusing to treat homosexuals?

Refusing to treat patients for incidents resulting from alcohol/drugs?

Refusing to treat atheists/adulterers/sinners?

If you can assist them with finding access to a doctor that will treat them, either in your practice or close by, then you should be allowed to refuse. I never would, but ethically speaking as long as you aren't the sole provider available, you shouldn't have to do something that compromises your beliefs.

 

That is of course assuming your contract allows you to do so. Good luck finding a hospital that would give you delivery privileges if you said you would only deliver married women.

[smilesammich 10,727]

53 minutes ago, MacUK said:

The cashier might....

 

Bacon is important!

 

I can't help wondering where the line between religeous freedom and personal freedoms will agree. So far there doesn't seem to be any way to reconcile the two.

 

What's next?

A doctor refusing to treat a pregnant woman who is unmarried?

Refusing to treat an STD if the patient is unmarried?

An emergency room doctor refusing to treat homosexuals?

Refusing to treat patients for incidents resulting from alcohol/drugs?

Refusing to treat atheists/adulterers/sinners?

exactly. this all makes me think of john 8:7 and i'm an atheist. a nurse refusing to treat a patient who has had an abortion is like, the opposite of every single thing my parents taught me about jesus. not to mention everything i was taught regarding the first amendment.

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

Just now, smilesammich said:

exactly. this all makes me think of john 8:7 and i'm an atheist. a nurse refusing to treat a patient who has had an abortion is like, the opposite of every single thing my parents taught me about jesus. not to mention everything i was taught regarding the first amendment.

I agree with your bible analogy but 1st Amnd ?

[smilesammich 10,727]

4 hours ago, jg121783 said:

I wonder if health care workers that don't want to preform a pap smear on a man will be protected.

i wonder if health care workers who don't want to treat deplorables will be protected. before you get all in a huff..same difference.

1 minute ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

I agree with your bible analogy but 1st Amnd ?

concerning the creation of this department within dhhs

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

1 hour ago, smilesammich said:

i wonder if health care workers who don't want to treat deplorables will be protected. before you get all in a huff..same difference.

 

Ummm, no.  A man trying to get a Pap smear because he identifies as a woman is not the same as a deplorable wanting to get a cut stitched up.  Or a democrat trying to get a prescritption.

 

One is a violation of science and biology, the other two just need simple medical care.

Edited January 19, 2018 by IDWAF

[smilesammich 10,727]

Just now, IDWAF said:

Ummm, no.  A man trying to get a Pap smear because he identifies as a woman is not the same as a deplorable wanting to get a cut stitched up.  Or a democrat trying to get a prescritption.

ummm, yes.

premise being, if a healthcare worker claims a patient's lifestyle choices, religious views, or voting preference offends their own lifestyle choices, religious views, or voting preference trump's new division of conscience and religious freedom department will be there to protect you. don't you know trump is god's own chosen candidate?

it's all relative on the proverbial slippery slope

[yuna628 9,676]

4 hours ago, bcking said:

There have been some cases of people paralyzed but not properly sedated. So awake but can't move and say anything.

 

At least the patients have claimed that they remember. It is probably a bit more complicated. Even under paralysis you would likely have significant vital sign changes if you truly were "awake". Not sure how an Anesthesiologist would ignore that.

 

But yes - I honestly don't care what a surgeon says or does. They are often unprofessional. If their outcomes justify their skill, I don't care.

Mom had to have surgery for cancer. She says she clearly remembers being awake at some point.. something in a kind of twilight, enough that she was able to recall conversation in the room. The doctor didn't believe at first until she repeated it back to him. She doesn't recall any pain (thank god!) and it was brief.There were vital sign issues going on, she almost reached a dangerous situation in the OR, but she just thought it was all just a dream.

 

She had it happen again during a colonoscopy. Remembers waking and looking at the screen and thinking ''cool, I'm going to watch a movie now''

 

2 hours ago, bcking said:

If you can assist them with finding access to a doctor that will treat them, either in your practice or close by, then you should be allowed to refuse. I never would, but ethically speaking as long as you aren't the sole provider available, you shouldn't have to do something that compromises your beliefs.

 

That is of course assuming your contract allows you to do so. Good luck finding a hospital that would give you delivery privileges if you said you would only deliver married women.

Ah yes but that's exactly what certain groups and demographics would like to see. The right of a doctor to refuse to deliver to anyone but married women and not lose their job or affect their ability to work at the hospital. It starts with small little things, like the premise in this article, and will continue..

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

1 hour ago, smilesammich said:

ummm, yes.

premise being, if a healthcare worker claims a patient's lifestyle choices, religious views, or voting preference offends their own lifestyle choices, religious views, or voting preference trump's new division of conscience and religious freedom department will be there to protect you. don't you know trump is god's own chosen candidate?

it's all relative on the proverbial slippery slope

Ever why would an alleged atheist say such a thing?

 

Don’t think voting preferences are covered under the constitution like religion and arms and freedoms of speech, are they?