Oklahoma Rape Victim Denied Emergency Contraceptives. Doctor Cites Religious Objection As Reason

personally if i were a doctor i wouldn't act against my conscience. it's sick for you to expect someone to do that.
besides u can go get the pill at walgreens if u're older than 17

I'd have to agree with those who say the entire story has been sensationalized. A doctor is not required to act against his own beliefs.

I didn't get that choice 30 some years ago. I was raped, got pregnant, (I was on the bc pill but I'm one of those it makes MORE fertile) , and since my dad even refused to take me to get even basic medical care, or even call the cops, the guy got away with it and I was stuck with what he left behind. Did I resent it? You bet. I was only 16. It took me a long long time to get past that- the betrayal of my own father, the rape, all of it. I don't know that you ever truly do get over it. It's affected my married sex life, the way I see myself, and I'm now 48. My father basically said "it never happened" and I was supposed to go along with that. Such a violent crime affects the entire way you live the rest of your life-it changes you. Since I had a kid out of the deal, it made my life much harder, especially when my father threw me out of the house at 11Pm at night, with 20 bux in my pocket and said he never wanted to see me again. (and he hasn't) His wife insisted I would be a bad influence on her 3 kids (my half siblings), and in the end gave him an ultimatum...me, or her. He chose her. I knew that would happen- she was his mealticket. I was merely his oldest daughter. Yeah, my life was expendable to him.

There- you have it from a rape victim. Do I think all hospitals should have rape kits? I think that not having one on hand at every hospital is a crying shame. An on-call nurse could service several hospitals if they were smaller. Just a thought......

SK

So does the hospital or gubmint supply the schedule for these SANE nurses to the public?

I would hate to be raped after hours or out of rotation.

reply to post by grey580

The doctor is free to believe what she wants.
However that should not give her the right to deny the girls rights either.

Bit of a contradiction there. I do believe the right to religious freedom includes not being forced to do something that is against your beliefs, otherwise said right to religious freedom means nothing and is a waste of space in the Bill of Rights.

You're advocating that the doctor be forced to go against her religious convictions, thats basically taking away her right to religious freedom. The girl could have asked for another doctor with less scruples.

Originally posted by popsmayhem
Go to another doctor..

Simple as that, if it was true
she would not be debating
with this crazy doctor she would
be getting her ass in gear to find
one who would.. Time is
of the essence, it would be silly
to stay there and argue.
Surely this was NOT the ONLY
doctor...

,” you can actually use any type of emergency contraceptive pill for up to 5 days (120 hours) and still significantly reduce the chance that you’ll get pregnant.

So the rape victim now has to drive around and find a doctor that will give her the medicine. What if the next Hospital is Catholic, and the one after that. . .

Originally posted by ElohimJD

Another silly conclusion. In the event the mothers life is in danger physically then the rules change; this woman was in no physical danger as a result of the pregnacy, therefore it is NOT a tree vs. fruit scenario in any way.

Childbirth is far more dangerous than abortion. Thus more women would be harmed or killed than if they didn't have the option to terminate. Simple statistics.

Plus it isn't a "baby" and using Emergency Contraception isn't an abortion in the medical sense.

Originally posted by ElohimJD
In the event that is was and this doctor still refused tto abort the baby to save the mother hen you would have a valid argument. The only life in danger for this doctor was the unborn child's (in her opinion) and her oath requires "no harm done".

A brainless organism such as a zygote isn't a person under the law. Funny how Christians don't picket outside IVF clinics. . . look at all those "babies" being harmed. The government doesn't consider them as people as it should be.

When President Bush discussed this issue with the Pope back when he had to make the decision to sign the bill banning stem cell line creation, the Pope suggested that all of the embryos currently in deep storage in fertility clinics should be brought to life by other women who wanted to carry the children, and then put up for adoption by good Catholic families. *rolls eyes*

Originally posted by ColoradoJens

Originally posted by petrus4

Originally posted by ColoradoJens
Interesting point of view. I assume you are not a woman and have not been raped. Perhaps it would be an issue to you then?

CJ

You mean like if you were a man, you likely wouldn't see that entire gender as disposable?

Probably, yes.

edit on 31-5-2012 by petrus4 because: (no reason given)

Riiight. Is it a myth that only women get pregnant? Apparently this is an issue for you, just not when women are raped. Got it.

CJ

Truthfully, I'm still trying to understand the idea of basing either gender's worth, exclusively on their role in the reproductive cycle. Are we really no better than that?

Originally posted by grey580
You missed this part. Please view the video as well.
It shows the mother telling her side of the story.

I did. Her story doesn't make sense. The hospital doesn't have the rape care capabilities so why would a doctor or nurse bother saying 'I refuse to give you medical care because it's against my religion' .. when the fact is that they were incapable of giving that care at that facility anyways?? It's not adding up.

Also add to the fact that this supposed news story is really only coming out of some far left wing blogs that obviously have a far left agenda .. that adds to the disbelief.

You need to read whitewave's post.

reply to post by whitewave

Originally posted by igor_ats
A brainless organism such as a zygote isn't a person under the law. Funny how Christians don't picket outside IVF clinics. . . look at all those "babies" being harmed.

Separate issue but I'll respond. A preborn human baby who is in the zygote stage is still just that .. a preborn human baby. And yes, the CATHOLIC faith considers IVF to be just as wrong as abortion. For every live baby born through IVF, there stands the ghosts of all the siblings who died while that one baby was being created. One live IVF baby = a whole lotta' dead brothers and sisters. Catholics (and other christians) pray and picket outside abortion clinics and many work to try to educate people about the deaths that come from IVF.

reply to post by FlyersFan


Yes, IVF is terrible in many ways. It is unnatural, expensive, it results in dozens of aborted fertilized eggs, and there are plenty of kids waiting for adoption, so IVF just seems selfish.

No offense to those who have gotten pregnant that way, I am very close to some people who chose that route. I don't agree with their decision, but it was theirs to make, not mine.

Originally posted by wildtimes

News-flash......that does not make it wrong for the young woman to still make a decision about her OWN LIFE, her OWN FUTURE......and to be capable of assessing her OWN DISPOSITION and circumstances to say whether or not she is ready to be an adequate mother!
It is HER BODY, and her mind, and her circumstances she has to live with!! Who are you to prescribe a point of view??

Now, now, now...none of that "leftist hysteria" advocating the rights and the choice of the existing human. We are only allowed to defend and protect the rights and choices of hypothetical humans.

Originally posted by igor_ats
A brainless organism such as a zygote isn't a person under the law. Funny how Christians don't picket outside IVF clinics.

I've noticed that in general, that is one of the primary distinctions between atheists and theists.

Theists or animists look for reasons to value life. Atheists (following the pattern started by Descartes) tend to look for reasons to devalue life.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by igor_ats
A brainless organism such as a zygote isn't a person under the law. Funny how Christians don't picket outside IVF clinics. . . look at all those "babies" being harmed.

Separate issue but I'll respond. A preborn human baby who is in the zygote stage is still just that .. a preborn human baby.

No it isn't a baby. A baby has a brain amongst many other things.

We have words like zygote, embryo, fetus and baby for a reason.

And to forstall the "well some doctor once called it a baby in colloquialism proves a zygote is a baby" - no.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
And yes, the CATHOLIC faith considers IVF to be just as wrong as abortion.

Except there has never been a reported picket outside an IVF clinic. Ever. The truth is what they say and their actions are completely different. They don't really care about the little "babies" in IVF clinics.

Originally posted by petrus4

Originally posted by ColoradoJens

Originally posted by petrus4

Originally posted by ColoradoJens
Interesting point of view. I assume you are not a woman and have not been raped. Perhaps it would be an issue to you then?

CJ

You mean like if you were a man, you likely wouldn't see that entire gender as disposable?

Probably, yes.

edit on 31-5-2012 by petrus4 because: (no reason given)

Riiight. Is it a myth that only women get pregnant? Apparently this is an issue for you, just not when women are raped. Got it.

CJ

Truthfully, I'm still trying to understand the idea of basing either gender's worth, exclusively on their role in the reproductive cycle. Are we really no better than that?

I'm still trying to understand where you would have gotten that idea? Who said that?

CJ

reply to post by igor_ats

No it isn't a baby. A baby has a brain amongst many other things.

We have words like zygote, embryo, fetus and baby for a reason.

And to forstall the "well some doctor once called it a baby in colloquialism proves a zygote is a baby" - no.

So..... when does it become a baby? At birth? At heartbeat? At brainwaves? At fertilization?

I mentioned earllier, my baby was born at 28 weeks. He was eligible for abortion, and it was suggested as one of our options. He was taken by emergency C-section, and I saw him at the very moment he was removed from the womb. He was a little, gray, wrinkly, alien-looking baby, but he was a baby, and he held my hand!! He wanted nothing more than to be held and loved for those next 3 months in the hospital. He didn't even care about food, just human contact.

Was he a baby? What if we had chosen to abort? What were we aborting?

For the record, at the age he is in this picture, many babies are still being aborted!


And here he is now! (the little one)

Originally posted by petrus4

Originally posted by igor_ats
A brainless organism such as a zygote isn't a person under the law. Funny how Christians don't picket outside IVF clinics.

I've noticed that in general, that is one of the primary distinctions between atheists and theists.

Theists or animists look for reasons to value life. Atheists (following the pattern started by Descartes) tend to look for reasons to devalue life.

Um no, no one needed reasons to de-value life. Religious types suddenly changed their minds and started to make everyone agree. The status quo is that unborn life did not have the same value as those born.

Theists look for reasons to impose their unrealistic religious principles on everyone else.

Not only do they ignore their claims of the proclaimed value of the unborn (IVF) they have a history of changing their mind on the value of the unborn. Abortion being murder (iow equal status being given to z/e/f's) only became Catholic doctrine around 150 years ago. The conclusion that early abortion is not homicide is contained in the first authoritative collection of canon law accepted by the church in 1140 amongst many other things I can bring up.

reply to post by getreadyalready


I was a little confused as well. I work in a pharmacy and the morning after pill doesn't require a prescription. All you have to do is ask for it at the counter. I was thinking maybe the rule varies from state to state? Or is there a more potent one that the doctor can give?

Thanks,
Blend57

reply to post by HoppedUp


Well.

I know that A) You're a man. and B) You've no medical education. Well I mean, scientific medical education.

WTF, Vitamin C is now a contraceptive?

Originally posted by blend57
reply to post by getreadyalready

 

I was a little confused as well. I work in a pharmacy and the morning after pill doesn't require a prescription. All you have to do is ask for it at the counter. I was thinking maybe the rule varies from state to state? Or is there a more potent one that the doctor can give?

Thanks,
Blend57

Found an article from March of this year.

1 in 6 pharmacies hinders teen access to morning after pill

That means 5 out of 6 are giving it to teens, and everybody is giving it to adults. Seems like pretty easy access to me. When I searched for an article, a million other advertisements came up for Planned Parenthood and the like. So you don't even have to go to a pharmacy, there are plenty of clinics willing to administer it in Oklahoma as well.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by igor_ats

 

No it isn't a baby. A baby has a brain amongst many other things.

We have words like zygote, embryo, fetus and baby for a reason.

And to forstall the "well some doctor once called it a baby in colloquialism proves a zygote is a baby" - no.

So..... when does it become a baby? At birth? At heartbeat? At brainwaves? At fertilization?

If ppl insist that zygotes in test tubes are in fact "babies", they are free to believe that.

However, if you can't tell the difference between a zygote and a newborn then I can't help you. A baby is born. The status of "baby" however is not why elective abortion is legal up until viability.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
I mentioned earllier, my baby was born at 28 weeks. He was eligible for abortion, and it was suggested as one of our options.

I have come across some Christians that argue even if the mothers life is at risk she should forego the consequences and continue the pregnancy. I'd rather the choice exist than not.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
Was he a baby?

In the womb? No. Late term fetus.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
What if we had chosen to abort?

Mothers choice at the end of day. Something Catholics don't want ppl to have. If it's a risk to the mothers life or severely deformed I don't see what the big deal is in having such a choice in late term pregnancies.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
What were we aborting?

Your future son or daughter. Or a late term fetus. Or a baby. Whatever you want to call it makes no difference to the law on abortion.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
For the record, at the age he is in this picture, many babies are still being aborted!

Define many. Most abortions are early term.

Once it is removed from the mother's body, it will either be capable of independent existence or it will not. Even if every precaution is taken to preserve that fetus's bodily integrity, it will not survive outside the womb unless it is viable.

The argument that organisms at early developmental stages have the same ontic and moral value as newborns is opinion. It's interesting that certain Catholic groups are trying to instigate a fertilized egg is a person under the law...