Last-Minute Bush Abortion Move Sparks Protest Inside Government

NY Times:

A last-minute Bush administration plan to grant sweeping new protections to health care providers who oppose abortion and other procedures on religious or moral grounds has provoked a torrent of objections, including a strenuous protest from the government agency that enforces job discrimination laws.

The proposed rule would prohibit recipients of federal money from discriminating against doctors, nurses and other health care workers who refuse to perform or to assist in the performance of abortions or sterilization procedures because of their "religious beliefs or moral convictions."

Read the whole story: NY Times

Comments

[4Detroit]

Some of these people don't even look at Bush nor acknowledge him with a head nod.

[bogues]

The thinking behind the religious zealots is that, God knows us before we are even conceived so aborting a fetus is going against God. If that is the case then all the pro-lifers who take birth control pills are going against God's will, every time that pill prevents them from getting pregnant. Having sex is a private matter, taking birth control pills is a private matter and having an abortion is a private matter. The federal government has no business making these choices for people.

[bannorhill]

Likewise you have no business making these choices for someone else either. These regulations prevent that.

[RallyGrrrl]

Bystander said:

"I can see why you don't want to answer my question about partial birth abortion...that would be telling. But to directly answer your question...no, I don't have the right to impose my views, which may be different from the law, on you. Nor do you have the right to impose your views on healthcare providers just because you lack their religious convictions about the sanctity of life."

There is a level of trust with healthcare professionals that is important to have, else risk second-rate care. It would do SO much harm to doctor-patient relationships to shake that trust. Whatever each of your morals or beliefs, a patient should get treatment that is in their best interest, medically speaking. Leave it to psychologists and moral counselors to give solicited advice about major medical decisions. Patients shouldn't have to question whether or not their provider will judge their morals and let that judgement affect treatment. It's business - it's the business of medicine, not morality. They are not priests, they are doctors, and it isn't about them.

[bannorhill]

You are right about trust between a healthcare professional and you. That is why it is important that when YOU choose the provider YOU should be sure that they share your values. If YOU ask at your first appointment then there will be no surprises and the trust will be built on solid ground.

If you oppose abortion you don't go to planned parenthood for advice. If you do go would you be surprised if they offer abortion as an option for treatment? Likewise if you want to explore all birth control options you don't go to a Catholic hospital.

If you have not asked your provider's opinion then it is your fault if he or she surprises you with a view opposite of your own. If your views do not agree take your business somewhere else.

[bogues]

This is what the religous right have been after all along and I hear that the anti-abortion group are going to march on Washington the day after Obama takes office. What cowards they are, they did not march on Bush's White House all these years. President elect Obama can reverse these last minute actions by Bush but of course the evangelicals will go nuts if he does.

[RallyGrrrl]

"Sister Carol Keehan, president of the Catholic Health Association, said that in recent years, “we have seen a variety of efforts to force Catholic and other health care providers to perform or refer for abortions and sterilizations.” ... Pharmacies said the rule would allow their employees to refuse to fill prescriptions for contraceptives and could “lead to Medicaid patients being turned away.” State officials said the rule could void state laws that require insurance plans to cover contraceptives and require hospitals to offer emergency contraception to rape victims...The Ohio Health Department said the rule “could force family planning providers to hire employees who may refuse to do their jobs” — a concern echoed by Cecile Richards, president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America. "

It isn't about the doctor's rights - it's about the patient's health. If you don't want to be in the position of possibly performing an abortion, then be a veterinarian. Be an orthopedist. Be an orthodontist. Be a plastic surgeon. Be a brain surgeon. There is only one area of one type of job that you shouldn't be in - and that's an OB/GYN. If you don't want to run the risk of shooting someone, don't be a cop. If you don't want to run the risk of being asked to perform an abortion, don't be that KIND of doctor!

[MossyOak]

May I add to your list? If you don't want to be responsible for killing people, don't become a health insurance adjuster.

[justobserve]

Our system is crazy anyway. Why on earth there are two presidents, so to speak, at the same time with one with real authority to do anything he likes before he leaves? It's the same as someone who is going to file for bankcrupcy transferring all of his wealth to someone else to avoid being snatched from creditors.

[chronic]

Bush is pure ev!l.


But karma comes back to bite ya.

[krayon]

amen

[MossyOak]

Boy does it ever. If he doesn't pay the price in this life, next time he'll come back as latrine bacteria.

[MAragon]

And the villainy continues. These last 60 days are going to be a nightmare. I wish Obama were going in tomorrow!!

[sammyscout]

What if a health care provider just wants to refuse service to 'F00Ls from Crawf0rd"

[gap08]

Well, love him or hate him, the time is coming near to say goodbye to George W. Bush. I would like to extend an invitation to anyone who has something to say to this President to post an open letter to GW at http://goodbye.us . This is a project to essentially create a time capsule of feelings and thoughts about the outgoing administration. So please, check it out and share!

[MakeAWish]

Then legally, I should be able to refuse service or care to a person who's religious belief I oppose, if it goes against my moral beliefs.

[MakeAWish]

What if I'm an atheists, or my political affiliation is different from the person I am required to care for. What about sexual orientation? Can I discriminate against anyone, and say it is morally wrong? A big old can of worms will be opened for sure.

[research]

Not if the licensing organization of your practice says it is the

best treatment.

If the Practitioners won't do it,

it is The Practitioners responsibility to seamlessly have someone else

step in a take care of it.

[OneLiberalLady]

One of the reasons behind these regulations is apparently the theoretical "moral objection" of health care workers to give out "rape kits" to women who are raped. These kits include Plan B contraceptiives which are NOT abortifacients. But the far right refuses to believe this, Here is what the New York Times has to say:
"As an example of the policies to which they object, Bush administration officials cited a Connecticut law that generally requires hospitals to provide rape victims with timely access to and information about emergency contraception."
Can you imagine someone being cruel enough to refuse a morning after pill to a woman who was raped? I can't.

[S-Jane]

To the extreme anti-choicers (calling them pro-life is too kind), once a woman conceives, she is merely an incubator to the fetus. Her life as her own no longer counts. Not only do they not care if a woman has been raped, they also disregard incest.

[RallyGrrrl]

Exactly. Women are animals for breeding, and should be thankful they are allowed to say "no" at all.

[pokemon]

My thoughts exactly. Look here the market would take care of itself, I want to have my N^T$ snipped, well I:

1. go to someone with delicate hands
2. go to someone with the ability to multi-task
3. does not have a problem with it religiously.

guess what, I get it done anyway and someone still gets my money. No offense to anyone but unless it was a crime against you or some-such I do not want my tax dollars paying for it anyway.

[lunchlady]

My experience in hospitals and other health care settings is that there isn't really any call for people to do procedures they object to. If you object to abortion you don't work in at a place that does abortions. If you want to work at a pharmacy you should expect to fill prescriptions for everything that's legally available. If the pharmacy hires you knowing that you will refuse to fill any prescription then they should have another pharmacist available.
So I don't understand the reason that Bush is sneaking this little goody in . I think its a gift to the WalMart heirs so their pharmacies aren't legally liable when a woman goes there and can't get her emergency contraception or her birth control pills. I think it might also be a part of some plan to somehow obstruct delivery of care for women in a variety of settings.
Why don't these mean people just stay home and not have sex with each other and leave everyone else alone? They don't want to pay taxes for programs for mothers and children so I don't understand why they want more unwanted babies around who often end up on the welfare and foster care lists- I think the answer is that they think they can stop all that naughty sex that's going on. Hah.

[gdaerin]

"obstruct delivery of care for women in a variety of settings"

Ding Ding Ding!

Yep, they want to take away our birth control and condoms. According to the radical fundamentalist Christians adults having sex deserve to be getting pregnant and having babies all the time.

How do you ensure that lower to middle classes Stay lower to middle class? Take away their birth control.

It's sick

[pokemon]

Lower middle class people have sex.... maybe I should quit my job.

[lipstick2008]

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

As V.I. Lenin said "Religion is opium for people".

[renastar23]

I believe that it was Marx, not Lenin, who said "It is the opium of the people" when speaking about religion.