Trump Admin Will Protect Health Workers Who Refuse Services On Religious Grounds

[Ohiogal]

Health care workers who want to refuse to treat patients because of religious or moral beliefs will have a new defender in the Trump administration.

The top civil rights official at the Department of Health and Human Services is creating the Division of Conscience and Religious Freedom to protect doctors, nurses and other health care workers who refuse to take part in procedures like abortion or treat certain people because of moral or religious objections.

"Never forget that religious freedom is a primary freedom, that it is a civil right that deserves enforcement and respect," said Roger Severino, the director of HHS's Office for Civil Rights, at a ceremony to announce the new division.

The establishment of the division reverses an Obama-era policy that barred health care workers from refusing to treat transgender individuals or people who have had or are seeking abortions.

More: https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2018/01/18/578811426/trump-will-protect-health-workers-who-reject-patients-on-religious-grounds

**********************

What say you, anyone here who works in the medical field? Would you turn your back on a transgender person who came into the ER with a life threatening gunshot wound, because your religion tells you that gay people are icky and sinners? Would you turn your back on a woman who came into your ER because she was bleeding to death from a botched abortion?

I find this morally reprehensible, and believe anyone who would refuse to treat a person because of their religious beliefs should not be working in the medical field. My two cents.

[TEB]

1. Unbelievable

[sarabelle]

27. These people are not really health workers then. They have moral oath to treat people.

We need a new President, new DOJ, new AG. We must vote these people out of office. Voting them out will be a definitive and conclusive way to get rid of them. Still file impeachment of Barr whether the Senate finds him guilty or not.

[hlthe2b]

2. Physicians swear an oath; other HCW's have ethical obligations. Let the licensure boards go after

them!

[unblock]

3. i don't think i feel the need to force people to perform abortions if they object to it.

however, i absolutely think a hospital should be able to fire anyone who refuses to care for a transgender person; or anyone due to their race, religion, etc.; or anyone just because they happened to have had an abortion years ago.

these same people with "religious objections" to things like abortion wouldn't think twice before treating someone who had raped or murdered someone years ago.


you don't acquire the "sins" of the patient merely by treating them, especially for something unrelated to the "sin" itself.

[get the red out]

31. As worrisome as hospitals

I always imagine an ambulance arriving at a home and a man answering the door and saying "My husband is having a heart attack!" and them turning around and leaving. IMO, it's not if this sort of thing happens, it's when, and it might already have for all I know.

[unblock]

35. yeah, sadly, this surely happens already.

even in hospitals, the survival rate for newborns and new mothers is worse for black people than white people.

it's extremely likely that's a function of inferior medical care (which is more broad than merely someone on staff refusing to help, but it illustrates that such problems exist.)


anyone in the medical profession who thinks like that needs to find another job. i don't care if your patient just shot up an entire school. you give them proper medical attention while they're strapped to a gurney and then let the police handle the criminal aspect. your job starts and ends with providing medical attention, period.


refusing to help in an emergency situation should be criminal, unless there's a genuine scene safety issue. the patient being non-white or homosexual or transgender or whatever doesn't make the scene unsafe, so you have to help.

[Brawndo]

36. If they feel that strongly about performing abortions they should find a different career

They need to stop putting themselves into positions where they have objections (religious or otherwise) to the duties of their job. Similarly, Kim Davis should not have been in the position of being a Clerk who would have to issue marriage licenses equitably. Or making custom cakes for only some people and not for others. If you can't bring yourself to euthanize animals, don't become a veterinarian. The duties of a job and the tenets of a faith should be carefully considered prior to accepting that job.

[unblock]

39. Agreed in general. But the medical profession is specialized enough

There's plenty of room for people who don't want to get trained to perform abortions, or any other particular procedure the object to, so it really shouldn't be a problem.

The problem I think comes in when another part of the team doesn't want to do their part, such as an an anesthesiologist who doesn't want to do their job when the patient is having or just had an abortion.

Even still, abortion access is so limited, just don't work in a place that provides them if it bothers you.

The bigger problem is people who won't treat homosexual or transgender people. Or black or brown people. So yeah, bigots should find a job where they don't have to face the public.

[Brawndo]

40. Yes, they are the bigger problem.

Objection on the grounds of "sincerely held religious beliefs" is just the latest weapon of the right in their crusade to legislate their morality onto others. I think these types conscientiously put themselves into these positions to grandstand and strike their very own blow in the culture wars. Their religious rights end where our civil rights begin.

[unblock]

41. yeah, there's no "religious" or other right to interfere with other people's lives

if you think homosexual activity is a sin, just don't do it.

there's no religious belief that says thou shalt close thine shop to gay people.

[Aristus]

4. They're not 'health workers'. They're hacks with medical licenses.

Treat the patient in front of you. Bottom line.

If the patients refuse treatment (as with anti-vaxxers, for example), that's different. But otherwise, if they're human beings, you treat them. Full stop.

[irisblue]

18. No lie. The person in front of you is the person you treat.

Wait, does this mean that RW republicans can be refused treatment?

[Aristus]

30. Nope. I've had right-wingers in my exam rooms before.

One guy could not stop ranting about President Obama. Didn't matter. I gave him 100% of my medical ability.

Yes, I saw the , but I still responded. It's an important subject, and proves yet again that we are better than they are.

[leftyladyfrommo]

5. What a nightmare that would be. Hospitals

Would be on chaos.

[Soxfan58]

6. As Hypocrites rolls over in his grave.

Using headbang alot lately!

[unblock]

42. hippocrates rolls over in his grave at the hypocrites in the medical profession

[ProudLib72]

7. Does that include refusing to care for anyone wearing a MAGA hat?

They are the sickest people of all!

[get the red out]

32. They need extra care

Mental health care.

[TeamPooka]

8. "Certain people"

“Certain people”

[no_hypocrisy]

9. It doesn't work that way.

Religious rights (so-called) will be trumped by the Civil Rights Act. Otherwise, a physician, nurse, etc. could refuse treatment of African-Americans like they used to. (Exhibit 1: Singer Bessie Smith died as a result of injuries from an car accident almost 100 years ago b/c a *white* ambulance was sent, not a "colored" one.)

Imagine you're on the way to dying and the only physician available is an evangelical Christian who thinks Jews are cheerleaders for Satan or your hymen is not intact and you're not married. That doctor refuses to treat you.

Plus, this would interfere with free commence and trade of services. Maybe a doctor WOULD treat you, but the anesthesiologist WON'T.

Get thee to federal district court posthaste!

[mr_lebowski]

10. What's going to be great fun is when a Muslim doctor lets a drunk driver who crashed into a tree

... just bleed to death in the waiting room.

Or maybe someone who works at a pay-day loan place, since they are involved in the collection of interest, which is against Muslim teachings, if I understand correctly?

Religious Freedom, don't you know.

[Volaris]

44. Oh THAT person will lose their medical licence for sure, because they

they based treatment on 'Sharia Law', instead of accepted medical standards.

Don't you know that religious freedom only applies to the Christian Religion (because Murica!!!)?

Actually, if John Roberts is in the right mood the day he gets this, he will probably let his bench eat this case alive, and tell the plaintiff to go fuck themselves for their trouble for bothering him with this nonsense.

[mr_lebowski]

11. I am curious about your comment ... are all transgender people ... gay?

I'm thinking not ... but I'm not an expert.

[irisblue]

14. No, not necessarily. Fundies get icked out over both Trans Ppl & LGBTQ ppl.

There is some overlap, human sexuality & behavior are fluid. The Radical Religious Right Wing hates both of us, with enthusiasm and malice.

[mr_lebowski]

17. Do you understand the point of the question, based on how the OP is written?

Just seemed like it's should've either said 'trans' in both places, or 'gay' in both places. Not mixing the two ... as they're not the same, to my understanding.

[irisblue]

19. I recall you are a meticulous writer.

You ~might~be over working this. IMO

[irisblue]

21. I recall we've had conversations about meanings before.

[mr_lebowski]

24. It wouldn't be the first time, and baby it won't be the last :) (nt)

[Volaris]

45. That's because most of them are probably secretly gay and hate THEMSELVES for it.

All it's gonna take is for ONE megachurch preacher to come out as Straight Married, but ALSO gay, and OK with this, and this whole house of Hate Cards will collapse around them.
So, to corrupt a phrase, 'Keep the Faith, Brother'!!!

[irisblue]

46. Where did you get that from please?

[Volaris]

48. Get what from?

Sorry, just confused

[MineralMan]

12. States control licensure for doctors and nurses.

Refusal to provide care can be grounds for removal of a license to practice. Perhaps that will have to be the next step, at least in states which are not Trumpist states.

[irisblue]

15. Some states licence Allied Health Care workers as well

I've had licences every midwestern state I've worked in.

[MineralMan]

22. That's true, as well, in most states.

It is one way to deal with this. Remove a few licenses from health care providers and things will settle down, at least in those states. Trump's federal government can't reach into state laws and regulation.

[Ohiogal]

16. What if

you are a gay person in need of immediate care, and the closest trauma center by far is a Catholic hospital?

[mr_lebowski]

20. Presumably you would show up to the Catholic Hospital, and just hope they don't suss out that you're

'one of them' before they save your bacon.

I wonder if these fundy pukes will try to make it illegal for you to 'lie' when asked if you're gay by a health-care worker.

That's probably next.

[irisblue]

23. What will happen, hypothetically, to the LGBT health care worker at that Religious Hospital?

In many states you can be fired if you are not hetrosexual.

[Ohiogal]

25. Well, religion schools have fired teachers

for being gay or for having a child that is gay.

So, what you say, iris, might happen, if they’re not doing it already.

Sad and sickening.

[mr_lebowski]

26. Good point, yet another total bullshit thing about this horribly misguided and evil idea (nt)

[get the red out]

33. Or maybe

Require people sew some kind of star or something on their shirts defining whether they are treatable by fundies or not, perhaps a "yellow star".

[mr_lebowski]

34. Great idea! A government-mandated rainbow tattoo on back of one's hand, perhaps?

A big green splotch tattoo could mean you're here on a green card, etc.

You know, to assist Religious folks who might want to decline to save your life at a hospital, or sell you a meal, etc?

[Ohiogal]

38. Don't give them any ideas

[samnsara]

28. then we have the power to REFUSE to use the services of anyone who engages in this type of...

Last edited Thu May 2, 2019, 03:12 PM - Edit history (1)

...discrimination. And we have YELP to make sure our protests are loud and clear.

[mainer]

29. I have moral objections to Trump voters

And I bet lots of medical people do as well.

[Ilsa]

37. I wouldn't want someone performing an abortion on me

if they had a bad opinion of abortion. I changed OBGYNs once because his nurse was anti-choice.

Most of the time, people working in specific areas of healthcare have to come to terms with all of the elements of that specialty, including abortion, oral contraceptives, etc.

[Takket]

43. Your Hippocratic Oath supersedes your religious beliefs

And if you can’t accept that you should not be allowed to practice medicine.

[Beantighe]

47. women are already being harmed

Women in the U.S. are already being harmed due to "religious freedom." It's just going to get worse.
https://www.birthrightfilm.com/