It would have been nice for George W. Bush to just fade away, like a bad memory. January 20, 2009 is not that far away. But no. He had to stick his big fat 'Christian' religious nose where it doesn't belong before he and his ilk creep away from Washington, D.C. Maybe he's a frustrated proctologist wannabe. That would explain a lot.
On December 18, 2008, the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services issued a chilling statement entitled "HHS ISSUES FINAL REGULATION TO PROTECT HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS FROM DISCRIMINATION."
Here is part of that statement: "In the preamble to the final regulation, the Department also encourages providers to engage their patients early on in “full, open, and honest conversations” to disclose what services they do and do not provide. While it would strengthen provider conscience rights, the regulation would in no way restrict health care providers from performing any legal service or procedure. If a procedure is legal, a patient will still have the ability to access that service from a medical professional or institution that offers it. For example, the regulation does not affect the ability of medical institutions to provide abortion services in accordance with the law."
Examples of how this regulation could allow health care providers to refuse treatments abound. Abortions, anti-AIDS drugs, day-after contraceptive pills might all fall outside belief-systems of certain doctors, nurses, or pharmacists. Here's another example:
Let's say you're driving through a county whose hospitals are staffed mainly by doctors who are Jehovah's Witnesses. Let's say you have an accident that requires a blood transfusion. Jehovah's Witnesses do not believe in blood transfusions. So be prepared, if you are conscious that is, and if not, your next of kin if they can be reached in time, to be engaged by your health care providers in “full, open, and honest conversations” to disclose what services they do and do not provide."
I can hear it now. "Hello patient X. I'm your 'Doctor'. Your suffering and imminent death can be prevented by a blood transfusion, but... well, you know how it is, gosh darn it, the God I worship (the only REAL one, of course) doesn't permit such foul degradations of the human body. But don't think we're totally without compassion. We've alerted the local cab company, and within about 30-90 minutes or so, the driver will take you to any heathen hospital you want. Your body may recover, but your soul, alas, will perish. What was that? You don't know of any hospital that does blood transfusions in the area? Do we know? Why of course we do. But our conscience simply will not permit us to tell you. Perhaps the taxi driver will know. Have a nice day. And may the God I worship (the only REAL one, of course) have mercy on your soon to perish soul."
Good bye, Dubya. And good riddance.
Friday, January 2, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Maybe it's me, but I don't read anything in your statement that says that a health institution would or would not provide a service in a "save a life" situation based upon a belief system. Or maybe I just can't believe that this could happen.
I do agree with the "Goodbye dubya and good riddance" part. How did this country survive for eight years with this dictator (oops! sorry! I meant to say "decider") as the head of our country.
The marvelous thing about government regulations is that they are open for interpretation, whether limited or extreme.
If you follow the link and read the final regulation, you may come to the same conclusion as I.
Your concern seems to be in the "save a life" category. Let's say, for argument's sake, that the regulation cannot apply where the life of the patient is in jeopardy. Does that make it okay for health care providers to dole out their services through the filter of their own personal belief systems in all other categories of medical care?
When people choose to be health care providers, they should not be allowed to look down their noses at patients and withhold services based on what they think is morally or ethically proper.
Choosing to be a health care provider does not mean you are going to forgo your belief systems. As you said "When people choose to be health care providers, they should not be allowed to look down their noses at patients and withhold services based on what they think is morally or ethically proper." is ideally correct, but realistically, I would bet doctors and nurses do it everyday. These regulations just shines more sunlight on the situation. I think our "Founding Fathers" had it correct when they tried to build a secular government, keeping religion out of it. Over the years and especially with GW Bush religious morals keep creeping into the governous of society.
I shall stop now as I may just nail my feet to this soap box and not stop!!!
I did not mean to imply that health care providers should forgo their belief systems. They can believe anything they want to. Just don't let those belief systems interfere with their job - providing the best health care possible. If they do let their personal beliefs interfere with providing care, they should be sued, and if found guilty, fined and/or jailed and/or lose their medical license.
Post a Comment