U.S. HealthCare Workers Are Free To Follow Their Beliefs and Conscience Again.

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: Hazardous1408

it's my understanding that all ob/gyn are given training in abortion during their residencies, although they may elect not to be if they have a religious/moral issue with it. Since they may run into instances where the procedure is necessary to ensure the health of the mother, it's kind of necessary that they know how to do it safely.

True, but I wouldn't want a heart doctor who's only had basic training.

My partner has been an ER nurse for 25 years. Do you have any idea how many times she has had to treat a drunk/druggie with swastika tattoos?

Why would a Jewish woman ever do that?

Because it's her job.

originally posted by: Hazardous1408
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

A nonsense article unrelated to what you was asked for...

And from it;

...hospitals, insurance companies and other health care entities that receive federal funding must cover or perform abortions and sex-reassignment surgeries, even if doing so would violate their religious beliefs.

Then they should give up their government/tax payer hand outs if they wish to flaunt their religiosity.

Abortionists are specialists... trained in the procedural process...
No one goes through that training unless they have already chosen to perform abortions.

You’re literally all very ignorant of that fact because you keep repeating contradictory gobbledygook.




I still wouldn’t want a doctor forced to work on my healthcare though, in any sense.
That’s a path towards potential malpractice out of malice.


Here’s one to ponder...


We have these;

1) The Right to freely practice your religion...

2) The Right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness...

3) The Right to not be discriminated against...



Then we have this;
Your Rights End where another’s begin.



So... Who’s Rights are sacrificed/nullified in this conundrum?
& how could it possibly be justified either way?




Can anyone say flustercuck?

What do you mean a nonsense article? It's exactly what's going on. Some people are just trying to obfuscate the matter with complaints about religious folk and miscarriages and what not

Friday January 19, 2018

It looks like 2 rules related to Conscientious Objection and Abortion were issued today by Health and Human Services.

1.)

The Trump administration says it’s reversing an Obama administration rule aimed at protecting Planned Parenthood and other providers from states seeking to freeze them out of funding.

The Health and Human Services Department said the move was restoring flexibility to states, but health advocacy groups said the action is clearly aimed at shutting down women’s access to abortions and, potentially, other healthcare as well.

2.)

“Additionally, HHS’ Office for Civil Rights (OCR) is announcing a new proposed rule to enforce 25 existing statutory conscience protections for Americans involved in HHS-funded programs, which protect people from being coerced into participating in activities that violate their consciences, such as abortion, sterilization, or assisted suicide,” HHS said.

SOURCE FOR BOTH: www.nbcnews.com...

The mainstream media is focused on tabloid and soap-opera subjects, while the Administration continues to shape the landscape of America, totally under the MSM radar.

This is a good thing! "HealthCare", in the true meaning of the word, is providing a "life" giving/sustaining, procedure. "HealthCare", is not some simple chick and dude, getting her knocked up and not wanting to be responsible for their actions. "HealthCare" is not a boy that can't accept the fact that he's a man. "HealthCare" is not a girl that can't accept the fact she's supposed to be a woman. Traditionally, Doctor's never F'd with non-"HealthCare" issues. The dregs of society have twisted the meaning of "healthcare", marriage and "democracy". Little libtard words and catch phrases,... "A woman's right to choose"... What about the dad/father? What are his "rights"? I know, it's a "patriarchal society". .. Enough said. This is a good thing. HealthCare people, can get back to providing healthcare, not "social engineering".

originally posted by: 0zzymand0s
My partner has been an ER nurse for 25 years. Do you have any idea how many times she has had to treat a drunk/druggie with swastika tattoos?

Why would a Jewish woman ever do that?

Because it's her job.

The vast majority of medical professionals are just like your partner. Their life priorities are ranked in proper order for performing the job with 100% integrity.

a reply to: carewemust

“Additionally, HHS’ Office for Civil Rights (OCR) is announcing a new proposed rule to enforce 25 existing statutory conscience protections for Americans involved in HHS-funded programs, which protect people from being coerced into participating in activities that violate their consciences, such as abortion, sterilization, or assisted suicide,” HHS said.

so why wouldn't that also include doctors who find it morally wrong to refuse to perform a medically recommended tubal litigation on a pregnant cancer patient while performing the c-section to deliver her child? doctors who find it reprehensible treat an ectropic pregnancy by slicing away part of the fullopian tubes when methotrexate serve the same purpose without the surgery and risk to future fertility? or maybe they just find it medical malpractice to send a women suffering from a miscarriage away from the hospital two to three times just to have her collaspe on the floor the last time...
all of which have been known to happen in catholic hospitals adhering to policies written up by the church leaders.
if it gives those working in secular hospitals the right to refuse to adhere, opt out of the policies in secular hospitals, shouldn't it also give the care providers in the religious hospitals the same freedom, and allow them to care for their patients in a way that allows them to live with their conscious also?
and if those doctors working in the religious hospitals should just find other jobs if they don't like the policies of the hospital, then why can't those who work in the secular hospitals also find other jobs?

a reply to: murphy22

This is a good thing! "HealthCare", in the true meaning of the word, is providing a "life" giving/sustaining, procedure. "HealthCare", is not some simple chick and dude, getting her knocked up and not wanting to be responsible for their actions. "HealthCare" is not a boy that can't accept the fact that he's a man. "HealthCare" is not a girl that can't accept the fact she's supposed to be a woman. Traditionally, Doctor's never F'd with non-"HealthCare" issues.

seems to me that those that would fit the description you are giving would more than likely take a trip to an abortion clinic??? who, in their right mind, would be working at an abortion clinic if they had a religious belief or moral problem with abortion.
they wouldn't, but occasionally, a women can find themselves in a more traditional medical setting, like a hospital, having some kind of medical problem of which, abortion might be one of the options to addressing that medical problem. sometimes it might be the safest option available.

This man is evil.

He did this because he hates women, and is a bigot.

Actually he did this because around 90% of his "master plan" is to simply remove or reverse anything Obama has put into place. Thus his decisions are very popular with those who opposed Obama, even if this plan is utterly stupid. There was a reason he had that "oh crap.. what do I do now?" look on his face once he won.

Some of you have zero grasp on reality. Nobody is forced to perform abortions or gender reassignment surgeries. You can be in healthcare and... wait for it... not work at those specialized facilities. Maybe a rare, life saving abortion if you're in emergency care.

On the flip side. I'm usually wearing shirts with some sort of satanic imagery on them, due to my preferred genre of music. If I go to the ER, near death, with one of these shirts on... I really hope I don't get a Dr. who believes in the sky wizard.

a reply to: carewemust

I'm sorry, but the fact that you can't see the problem with this whole thing speaks volumes. Healthcare professionals are there to be, you know, professional. It is not their place to dabble with morality. If a procedure is legal, then they must go ahead with it.

originally posted by: roadgravel
Letting some bible thumper determine some's health needs based on their own religious beliefs. WCGW...

Right..Because only bible thumpers don't want to perform abortions and perform sex change operations.

Not treating a person who needs medical attention is wrong, period. And shame on anyone who claims otherwise.

a reply to: carewemust

Heck yeah. Just because people work in the healthcare industry it doesn't mean that they must be forced to do things that they disagree with... Many people in the left could not understand this and all they saw was their own view and only their view should be respected and forced on others.

a reply to: LordAhriman

Who seems unable to grasp reality is you. BTW, if you think that someone who "believes in satan" is going to save your life you are in for a treat.

BTW, here are some reports of what you claim is not reality...

Twelve Nurses Forced to Take Part in Abortions

NURSE ‘FORCED’ TO HELP ABORT
BTW, i didn't make the article in caps, that's directly from the source.

Nurses Testify on Being Forced to Do Abortions: ‘I Still Have Nightmares’

Catholic nurse forced to participate in abortion, lawsuit filed





But that has not been happening just in the U.S.

Canadian Nurses Forced to Perform Late-Term, Genetic-Based Abortions

a reply to: dawnstar

In a miscarriage, the baby has already died, and you know that, yet you persist in using this as an example.

Also I think you meant tubal ligation. Litigation is something lawyers do.
And you've never been in a Catholic hospital have you.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
a reply to: carewemust

I'm sorry, but the fact that you can't see the problem with this whole thing speaks volumes. Healthcare professionals are there to be, you know, professional. It is not their place to dabble with morality. If a procedure is legal, then they must go ahead with it.

Theres a reason biomedical ethics exists. I took a course in 1977.
www.medindia.net...

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Catholic nurse forced to participate in abortion, lawsuit filed

Hospital officials told Cenzon-DeCarlo that the situation was an “emergency,” although evidence suggests that this was not the case. The hospital itself labeled the case as a “Category II,” meaning that the operation needed to take place within six hours. This would have allowed enough time to find another nurse without moral objections to assisting in the abortion, her lawyers said.

www.catholicnewsagency.com...

so, ya it's okay to leave the women there in what sounds like a critical condition, let's stall around till the next shift comes in and we have a nurse that is willing to place some value the mothers health and well being and not be willing to risk losing that life in a vain attempt to save the fetus!!

Nurses Testify on Being Forced to Do Abortions: ‘I Still Have Nightmares’

“I was preparing for what I thought was going to be a common procedure following a miscarriage,” she said, tearing up, “only to realize that I was being asked to perform an abortion on a live 22-week-old unborn baby.”

www.newsbusters.org...

Just one name.... Savita Halappanavar, if you don't know who she is, look her up!!!


This next one is the rehash of the first articles that I took quotes from, but gives another important detail.....

NURSE ‘FORCED’ TO HELP ABORT

The hospital even exaggerated the patient’s condition and claimed the woman could die if the nurse, a devout Catholic, did not follow orders, the nurse alleges in a lawsuit.
nypost.com...

oh, so not only was that first women in a critical state, she was at risk of dying!!!!

and to think that their is who chains of hospitals in the country that are refusing to allow their doctors and nurses to provide the same kind of care that these nurses are, even when their conscious dictates that they should be!!

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

Kind of think all three of my sons maybe have been born in one, but that is not part of that discussion or relevant, since I have rather non eventfull births and came out with healthy babies.. my problem wasn't that my body wanted to expell them early, it wanted to hold onto them as long a possible.... my first pregnancy went something close to 10 months.. before the water broke and I walked across the street to the hospital...

as far as your first point..... I'll give you the name again... Savita Halappanavar.... I could come up with more names, but I know you've already seen them, you just insist ignoring the fact that some women can go days while their body tries to expell their living, non-viable fetus and need medical care to prevent bleeding to death or dying from infection.

a reply to: dawnstar
from the NY PO article.....shows pressure and threats from the Union.......

The day after the procedure, Cenzon-DeCarlo filed a grievance with her union. Later that week, she was cornered by two supervisors who told her if she wanted any more overtime shifts, she would have to sign a statement agreeing to participate in abortions, the suit says.

nypost.com...

The other article states that "Federal statues prohibit recipients of federal health funds from requiring employees to perform abortions." The article also stated that she told the hospital when she was hired she did not want to perform abortions. The article states it was not even a Category II emergency.