Bush's Parting Shot Undermines Health Care
Very little about the Bush administration could surprise me anymore, but I was completely disheartened when -- despite the written opposition from more than 200,000 Americans, 150 members of Congress, a bipartisan coalition of governors and attorneys general, the American Medical Association, and women's health organizations like Planned Parenthood -- the Department of Health and Human Services issued a last minute regulation that will undermine health care access at nearly 600,000 pharmacies, clinics, and hospitals across the country.
This sort of "take the drapes on your way out" approach is the final chapter of an administration that has prized political ideology over health care for their entire eight years -- and the rule issued yesterday, with little more than 30 days left in office, is the ultimate holiday gift to the extreme right.
Under this new rule, doctors and health care workers of all kinds can deny patients vital health care information and services, without the patient even knowing. No patient is exempt from the reach of this rule: sexual assault victims could be denied information about emergency contraception that could prevent unintended pregnancy, moms hoping to time their pregnancies can be denied contraception at their local pharmacy, young adults hoping to be tested for sexually transmitted infections could be denied treatment by health care employees who oppose premarital sex.
In short, this rule is likely to create total chaos in an already stressed health care system, and for low-income women and families, this rule may spell the end of the few available health care options. Essentially, any patient that utilizes health care at a provider that receives any federal funds will be subject to the luck of the draw in terms of what kinds of reproductive health care they are offered. This might seem far-fetched, until you realize that groups like Pharmacists for Life have campaigned nationally to have pharmacies refuse to provide women birth control prescribed by their physician.
If you had any doubt that this rule is about politics, not health care, just watch the high-fives among the far right. "This is a huge victory for religious freedom and the First Amendment," said Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council.
The bottom line in health care has always been that patients' health comes first; this regulation turns that basic tenet on its head. In fact, they failed to address the basic questions of patients' rights lodged by hundreds of thousands of Americans during that period.
For months, Planned Parenthood has spoken out against the proposed regulation. When a draft version of the rule was leaked last summer, we were the first out of the gate to point out the damage this regulation could do to women's health care. And, in the days and weeks to come, we will work with the new administration and Congress to overturn this disastrous rule. Our goal has always been to expand -- not limit -- patients' access to full health care information and services. If you want to help, please sign our petition.
And count your blessings that this administration is almost finished.
Cross-posted on RH Reality Check.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
" federally funded health care providers to decline to participate in services to which they object, such as abortion." If I read this correctly, "abortion" is only one example of services to which health providers could object. I can envision health providers objecting, for example, to dispensing viagra and its relatives on the grounds that if God wishes a person to be able to procreate then He will make sure they do not suffer from "erectile disfunction." Perhaps if this thinking caught on, the problem would regulation would soon go away.
Why haven't we heard from the AMA on this? I can't imagine they would think this is good thing.
Note to the "Pharmacists for Life" group. If you are not willing to provide medication as prescribed by a doctor find a new career. It's the doctor's job to determine what is appropriate for the patient, not yours.
This should not be buried in the middle of the page! Plain and simple that is the same treatment the MSM media will give this--if they get around to reporting on it at all. Shameful.
Obama and health care. Just this last week a meeting was held in our local library. The meeting was an information gathering of health care concerns. This meeting was set up by the in coming Obama administration. I understand meetings like this will be held nationwide (I guess in a wide varierty of select communities).
This is a first, someone asking the public general concerns about our health care system.
I have faith in the Obama team that something will be done about health care, maybe not right away but something will be done and just maybe it will be done right.
We need to trust our professionals in the health care industry and if they give us incomplete information that certainly does not develop a trusting relationship. I, for one, do not want to be at the whim of some pharmacist who may not want to fill a prescription because of his or her values. I do not care what their values are! Next they may not want to fill a prescription for depression because they believe in wholistic medicine. It is a slippery slope that leads to chaos, as the author said.
Does the Bush administration ever act for the greater good? It seems it always acts for some narrow big business or ideological segment of the few, turning the reigns of society over to those with a very narrow, self-interested agenda. It shows how damaging the agenda of the extreme right is to the larger society.
First, let us understand. Thanks to Georgia, the Republicans can still do a filibuster
on anything the Democrats try to do. This is why king george will continue to do what he is doing until January 20th.
Trying to change anything George did is going to be very difficult for Obama and for the rest of us. There is only one way to get out of this mess. And that will be when the
Republican party becomes non existent.
As it stands, Republicans against the Democrats will continue to be a problem.
Sorry (Georgia) if I named the wrong state.
Sadly
Americans are too stupid to change the Health Care game (yes I know that is harsh), however, in the absence of any other evidence ... it's true.
See R.W. Sanders's Profile
Why is this story not the headline on the site? As a disabled person this decision could have a devastating effect on my health. I take methadone for a chronic pain condition. I have been on this medicine since my physician prescribed it years ago. Unfortunately for me, this is also the medication doctors use to bleed junkies off of heroin. It is a highly addictive narcotic that can mimic the effects of heroin. I have often been looked down upon by pharmacists when I pick up my prescription. To think that I could be denied my medicine because some clerk at a pharmacy objects to that drug terrifies me. Without this drug, I would go into withdrawals. This could be life threatening only because I inadvertently offended a stranger's ideology. If this idiotic policy remains in effect, I fear for my life.
The only REAL comcern of this article, along with planned parenthood, is that doctors and other healthcare providers won't recommend abortions. I can't see even pro-life doctors not recommending contraceptives or pain management specialists holding back certain meds such as methadone because it's used in rehab clinics. It wouldn't make any sense doing that, in the minds of doctors, except to vindictive ones. Then it's time to find another doctor.
Time to start boycotting the stores that have "Pharmacists For Life" working in them. If these people have such a difficult time doing a required job because of their beliefs, then they need to find employment elsewhere and not in the healthcare field.
Sounds good in theory, but what about the people that don't have any other pharmacies to go to.
Mail order?
A spineless, Democratic-controlled House of Representatives is responsible for this. If they had hog-tied the President with impeachment proceedings, he would not be able to sell off pristine lands to the highest drillers/bidders, nor would he have pulled this absurd stunt. It is absolutely unthinkable that the same people who impeached Clinton for having consensual sex have failed to deliver to the American people - and the world - this time, when the offenses may very well lead to the Hague. Dennis Kucinich did all the work for them, had all the goods, and Pelosi said , "No thanks, too distracting." Shame, shame, shame!!
The Republicans had the bodies to make sure that any impeachment effort would explode on the launchpad.
I hate pointing that out, but it's the reality.
This is a very arcane posting,I think he's talking about abortion mostly.These are not done in hospitals since so many of the staff objected .In a clinic the staff are preselected,the right to contraception is a problem if someone has objections,but I doubt this ever happens.Even those who may not wish to will do so to prevent a possible abortion. "Women's health issues"is code for abortion ,why not use the term,it's a lot clearer,we're not talking about acne care here.I would assume that those who do not wish to participate have not done so in the past and the service was always available.
Not necessarily so. If a pharmacist doesn't approve of gays, and sees AIDS as a divine retrubition, may refuse to fill anti-virals. A Christian Scientist who doesn't approve of anti-biotics for children, may not mention it. The pharmacist may refuse the teenager the birth control pills she takes to help control her endometriosis - because they don't approve of 'encouraging' pre-marital sex. The issue is that the people in question do not have to state reasons - explain why - they can just omit telling you treatment options, refuse your medication, and deny care. It is too broad. It is easy to say, "Well, we don't have to worry, because we're not doing X, Y, Z" - but it can affect us and our families.
Sadly, this is another "I told you so" moment; for those who have been slow to support impeachment of this shameless and immoral national disaster. We have about 8 years of malfeasance to remind us that evil spreads when good women/men do nothing. However, for as long as this additional insult is allowed to persist, let's make sure we get Obama to add an additional requirement for health care providers enacted so that full disclosure is made on whether they have provided every possible form of relevant information or option available elsewhere, regardless of whether they agree with all such options. And lets go back to providing adequate incentives for trial attorneys, by undoing the caps that have been imposed in recent years for negligent medical treatments.
From down here in Australia this decision looks bizarre and medieval. It would not and could not happen here. Belief systems should not endanger the health of Human Beings. The very idea is despicable. I hope you guys are able to have this illogical decision overturned.
Good to hear from someone outside the US. I NEVER thought something like this could happen here either. It's completely shocking. Beware of your religious right. They've hijacked this country.
See R.W. Sanders's Profile
Hear, hear! In California there is a $250,000 cap on malpractice suits. Therefore, if an attorney must spend more that a couple of hours on the case, it becomes unprofitable for him. About the only way to engage an attorney is if someone dies. This is pitiful and makes for bad health care.
When this was first talked about earlier this fall, I emailed
Hillary Clinton and my Senator, both strong advocates of
womens health issues, and encouraged them to look into
this. Republicans do not want health care and especially
reproductive health care, paid for out of Federal funds. The
fundalmentalist want abortion rights overturned, contraception
banned and abstinance taught. They have never answered
the questions of who pays for unwanted children, pre-natal
and post-natal care, and health care of children after that.
This will not be easy to overturn, and it has no boundries to
how far it reaches.
I can kind of understand why they are so strongly opposed to abortion, but I cannot for the life of me understand their objection to contraception.
The possible ramifications are quite serious. For example, say I go in for an HIV test, to see if a recent partner has given me the plague. If technicians in the lab are hiv-phobic, they may refuse to process the test, even after the samples have been sent in. I would never know about it, unless I make an issue of it after not receiving the results of the test, three or six months down the road. And even then, I'm no closer to finding out if I host HIV anti-bodies.
What is healthcare even for, I ask, if one cannot get the honest results of tests, that would let one know he is at risk for AIDS or other conditions?
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
