Rape victim denied morning-after pill

[kpete]

From: Bring It Onhttp://www.teambio.org/2006/07/rape-victim-denied-morning-after-pill/

A RAPE VICTIM!!! Got that people, not some “we weren’t ready” or “oooops” situation — A RAPE VICTIM!!!

A Good Samaritan Hospital emergency room doctor refused to give a rape victim a morning-after pill because he said it was against his Mennonite religion.

Rebuffed by the doctor, the woman called her gynecologist, who wrote the prescription. Her local pharmacy told her it was out of the drug and referred her to a sister store in Reading. http://www.pennlive.com/news/patriotnews/index.ssf?/base/news/115383211470590.xml&coll=1

Go ahead, any of you fence sitters thinking of voting Republican in November needs to make a list of freedoms they currently enjoy and decide which is more important, your freedoms or your loyalty to a party that has clearly been hijacked.

[LeftCoast]

1. This is outrageous!

:grr:

[Warren DeMontague]

2. Again?

This isn't the first time.

Anyway, it's all part of the agenda. Rape victim, 12 year old molested kid.. they don't give a shit. It's all about the fertilized egg having rights under the 14th amendment.

[Lars39]

3. And she was able to leave the hospital.

What is a rape victim who sustained a lot of injury and has to stay in the hospital past the window of opportunity supposed to do? :grr:

[rodeodance]

4. I so tire of the "I know what is best for you" crowd!

[Nobody]

8. And why do they get to make choices for other people?

Maybe I should start making personal choices for them. Tomorrow, the next pharmacist who denies a valid prescription for contraception, including Plan B, will find that their home is for sale and that they will soon be moving to Inner Mongolia. I have decided that Inner Mongolia is a wonderful place to live, the people are friendly, and the cuisine is excellent. Of course I'm not going to move there, I after all, am not a thoroughly compassionless human being.

And I apologize to the Mongolians who will now have to put up with them, but the population density is low enough, they need never interact with their newest immigrant unless they want to.

[Xithras]

5. I have one question here.

I tend to take the dissenting view on this one. I believe that everyone has a right to live by their own moral guidelines, and if a person doesn't want to participate in an abortion they should not have to. If a Mennonite doctor doesn't want to prescribe the morning after pill, he shouldn't have to.

HOWEVER

This woman was in a HOSPITAL, which presumably has more than one doctor. You can't tell me that in an entire hospital full of educated medical professionals, there wasn't ONE doctor on staff willing to prescribe it. The doctors response should have simply been "I'm sorry, I can't prescribe that. Let me get you someone who can." I have NO problem with the passage of a law requiring doctors who refuse to dispense the pill to refer or call in another doctor who will do so.

I also happen to think that a doctor who morally objects to the morning after pill SHOULD NOT be treating rape victims.

[MichiganVote]

6. Use of the "Morning After" medication is NOT an abortion

The medication prevents fertilization, it does not expel or otherwise disrupt a fertilized egg.

How many medications have you taken to prevent a common cold?

[unblock]

17. uh, no.

it does not prevent fertilization, it prevents implantation.

personally, i don't find a big moral difference. i think the popular obsession with the moment of conception is a classic case of a little learning being a dang'rous thing.

[MichiganVote]

19. Right, implantation. I mispoke.

Not to pick a scab but whether the "moral difference" is small or large for some people, there is still only one person who becomes the parent of a child concieved from rape. The so called 'moment' of conception is considered by some women to be a ridiculous construct invented by sexists.

[calmblueocean]

27. You didn't misspeak, you got it completely right :-)

Emergency Contraception works to control ovulation and prevent conception from ever occuring: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_contraception#Emergency_contraception_in_relation_to_abortion

I've been spreading that link around quite a bit, I guess. Just seems like there's so much confusion on the subject. Even the doctor in this article was confused! The bitter irony is that by *refusing* to give her emergency contraception, the doctor may have caused the abortion he says he was so morally set on preventing.

[MichiganVote]

40. Thanks calm, this is very helpful.

[calmblueocean]

26. It *does* prevent fertilization. It works the same way all BCPs work!

It controls ovulation. That prevents fertilization. More info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_contraception#Emergency_contraception_in_relation_to_abortion

[unblock]

37. apparently it depends on the dosage

thanks for the link, it clarifies the two usages:

"The drug mifepristone may be used either as an ECP or as an abortifacient, depending on the dosage given. In the USA it is most commonly used in 200- or 600-mg doses as an abortifacient"

[calmblueocean]

43. Not for Plan B.

The doctor could've prescribed levonorgestrel, otherwise known as Plan B, which is not an abortifacient. Plan B is the most widely prescribed emergency contraception, and much less dangerous to take than mifepristone. The article even specifically points out that it was levonorgestrel (or another progestin-based, non abortifacient EC) that the doctor denied the patient:

Emergency contraception, often called the morning-after pill, gives a high dosage of birth-control medicine that can prevent pregnancy.

It's a pill that Dr. Martin Gish, the physician who treated the rape victim, said he has prescribed.

Why he suddenly decided birth control pills were abortion pills, I don't claim to understand. Either way, the doctor completely failed his patient here, and is guilty of malpractice in my book.

I do have to say one thing, though: Why do the drug companies always come up with such awful names for EC drugs? Mifepristone was formerly known as RU-486, a name that its opponents seized on with gusto, as in "Are you for '86ing little babies?!" A little study beforehand might have helped.

Plan B is a pretty awful name, too, in my book. Plan B is what you implement when Plan A fails, and a common intuitive reading is that Plan A was "Don't get pregnant!" My suggestion? Change the name to PrevCon. As in "prevents conception".

(Or "prevents consevatives" if you're feeling mean.) :)

[Crunchy Frog]

28. It does NOT prevent implantation.

If it did, it would continue to be effective for around a week, rather than only for the 1st 3 days, with effectiveness diminishing even over that time period. Implantation does NOT take place during the first 3 days following intercourse.

Please read the linked article for some scientifically accurate information. http://www.wired.com/news/medtech/0,1286,67432,00.html?tw=wn_story_related

[MichiganVote]

39. Thanks Crunchy, good to get my facts straight

[walldude]

9. A doctor who objects to the best course of action for the

health and sanity of his paitents should not be a doctor at all...

[Nobody]

10. You get one practicioner

And most of the time in an emergency situation, you don't get to choose who that one practitioner is.

There may be dozens of qualified doctors on staff, but only one doctor sees you, treats you, and prescribes for you. The various nurses, candy stripers, volunteers, medical technicians you may see are not qualified to prescribe medications. The doctor is, and you get one.

Furthermore, people with moral objections to prescribing certain meds will almost never offer to find someone else who will give it to you. By refusing you medication, they are doing their best to keep the medication they object to out of your hands. That's their goal. They are not going to defeat that goal by getting someone else to do it unless obligated to do so by law. So far that law is not yet on the books.

If you are morally opposed to something, no problem. You do not see anti-smoking crusaders working for tobacco companies, you do not see Jehovah's Witnesses working at blood banks, restaurant servers of the Jewish or Muslim faiths serve ham sandwiches all the time. If any of these refused to do their jobs when a moral objection came into play, they would all be looking for work and not have a leg to stand on.

It should be no different for pharmacists and doctors. Anyone who is going to refuse to prescribe Plan B, or any contraceptive should not enter the field of gynecology.

[knitter4democracy]

22. I'd bet he was obligated to find a new physician.

Most hospital staff policies require that--refusal of care requires the doctor (who's already entered into a doctor/patient relationship with the patient) to find a new doctor who will treat. It's also often in state laws.

[akushuki]

14. A cop has to enforce laws whether or not he agrees with them...

HE made a choice to be a doctor and that means he must administer health care to those that need it regardless of race, financial status, insurance policy, etc etc.
What if a doctor refused to treat a gay man that has AIDS because he disagrees with his lifestyle?

His license should be removed and the hospital should have to pay a large settlement to this lady to ensure that this does not happen in the future.

[Ms. Clio]

35. exactly

and then there needs to be legislation to prevent it from ever happening again.

[w4rma]

15. What the heck is the difference? The one doctor knows that the other

doctor will prescribe the medicine. The one doctor might as well have done it themself.

Just skip the middle BS and make these unethical "moral" jerks do their jobs.

[Solon]

16. Any doctor who refuses treatment to a patient for non-medical reasons...

should get his license revoked, and fined, heavily, for violating his oath.

[femrap]

18. That narrow-minded, patriarchial-obsessed,

insecure, small-dicked smug mennonite can leave medicine and go work on cars...HE IS TO DO NO HARM.....AND TO FORCE A RAPED WOMEN TO HAVE TO HAVE AN ABORTION WHEN HE COULD INSTEAD PROVIDE PLAN B IS WORTHY OF CRIMINAL CHARGES.

He shouldn't be allowed to treat women patients PERIOD....then he'll never have to worry about his troubled conscience ever again. Why doesn't he go treat feet? He doesn't care about LIFE....he cares about having power and oppressing women. I'm sick and tired of these men with their little sob stories about caring for zygotes. Maybe he should be trying to get a law passed that castrates rapists!

Yes, isn't Dr. Martin a real Good Samaritan....NOT.

[knitter4democracy]

21. He's supposed to find a new doctor.

If a doctor refuses to treat a patient, he's obligated to find someone who will. That's the AMA's position, and it's often in hospital staff policies. It doesn't matter what it's about, that's for the safety of the hospital, the safety of the doctor (refusal of care is also often covered in state laws, so she might be able to sue), and the safety of the patient.

[Solo_in_MD]

23. Concur, but the doctor should be fired

The MD should not have to do things he considers immoral, and there was no reason that the hospital staff did not get another attending physcian to step in. What if any alternatives were offered to her was not mentioned, but I can not imagine that nothing was done. The article has a bit of a hit piece slant to it in that regards.

I also agree that under the circumstances, that MD should not have been the one treating her since it was easily foreable that the morning after pill would likely come up in a rape case. That is an issue for the head of emergency services. He should not be compelled to employ an MD in the ER that is not willing to follow accepted protocols.

In summary, the MD has the right not to prescribe it, but he does not have the right to work in an ER where it is accepted practice.

[Ms. Clio]

36. what if a doctor thought interracial marriage was "immoral"

could he refuse to treat one member of the couple?

[Solo_in_MD]

42. Probably he could legally

though the laws vary with jurisdictions. However, no hospital has to give him privileges, no insurance plan has to make him a preferred provider etc. I am not comfortable with the state dictating private actions, but see nothing wrong with him being unemployable if his beliefs interfere in the workplace. Its the thought crimes thing though I support some exceptions to that such as equal housing etc.

Let me use a less loaded example: I think blue cars are death machines and will kill me. If I work in an office and have nothing to do with driving cars, thats fine. However, if I worked as a valet, it would not be. Same with nurses who refuse to support abortion for purposes of birth control. They have every right to believe it is wrong, but if the hospital does they work at performs them and they refuse to participate, the hospital has every right to fire you/not to employ you. Same thing with pharmacists etc as well.

My underlying position is that people who take stands based on their beliefs should be willing to pay the price for their beliefs as appropriate, regardless of their beliefs. Same thing with schools and protests. Skip an exam to go to a protest without making prior arrangements is fine, but accept the fact you cut class.

[Ms. Clio]

47. Isn't discrimination based on race illegal?

A restaurant could not refuse to serve that couple, so how could a doctor refuse to treat them?

That's why I used this example -- it's not illegal to have wacky fantasies about blue cars, especially when those fantasies aren't affecting anyone else.

[Solo_in_MD]

48. Thus my comment about the variance between jurisdictions

But bear in mind, all they have to do is *claim* that the refusal is for something other than protected classes. For example, a resturant could have a no blue car policy. If the couple complained that it was racial, they could point to the blue car. Proving that kind of issue is quite hard.

However where a MD has taken a public stand as in the OP, there is no burden of proof and there is no reason he has to be hired or given privledges.

[calmblueocean]

25. Plan B *prevents* abortions. It works by stopping ovulation.

Just finished writing on this subject in another thread :)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2412812&mesg_id=2413622

[ComerPerro]

31. anyone who puts insane religious views before helping patients

should be banned from practicing.

[SmokingJacket]

41. The hospital has an obligation to hire people who will do their job.

Would they hire a doctor who refused to give blood transfusions? I certainly hope not.

[ljm2002]

45. Your position is untenable

If every doctor gets to choose what they will or will not treat, then no one can be sure of getting competent medical attention. You say that there must be at least one doctor who will be willing to make the prescription. But, what if that doctor is at home asleep? What if the entire staff is Mennonites? What if you come in with an injury causing great loss of blood, and your attending physician has moral qualms about blood transfusions?

It all sounds so good "on paper", sure, let everyone live "according to their own moral guidelines". Thing is, everyone can do that anyway. But there are professional standards as well. In this case, the doctor who does not want to make a certain prescription could -- for example -- practice another profession where he or she will not be expected to do so.

And of course, there is always the question: does the "good doctor" refuse to write prescriptions for Viagra? I'm betting not.

It absolutely amazes me how far down the road we've gone, where people can rationalize this sort of thing. I'm sure your intentions are good, but you are trying to accommodate people with whome there is no middle ground. Give in to this, and next thing you know, it will be refusal to provide contraception. Then it will be forced marriage for pregnant girls. It is a natural progression. These people want nothing less than control of women's sexuality. They really do want to go back to a time when women were chattel. We are marching down that road at this very moment. This is why feminists used to say, if men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament. Believe it.

[Bluebear]

7. 'Good Samaritan Hospital' nt

[kiki]

12. Mmmmm... irony. n/t

[Zhade]

11. kick/rec

could get lost quickly!

[Bluebear]

13. again from me

[Gold Metal Flake]

20. Compassionate Joementum.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jane-hamsher/lieberman-betrays-rape-vi_b_17312.html


Lieberman said he believes hospitals that refuse to give contraceptives to rape victims for "principled reasons" shouldn’t be forced to do so. "In Connecticut, it shouldn’t take more than a short ride to get to another hospital," he said.

[spacelady]

24. Hippocratic Oath should take precedence this so-called "DOCTOR"

should be re-assigned. Or stripped of license.

[Crunchy Frog]

29. People with such piss poor medical knowledge

should not even be allowed to practice medicine. His religion has fuck all to do with it. Plan B does NOT cause an abortion by any definition of the term.

What's next, Scientologist ER doctors refusing to give emergency psych meds because it goes against their religion?

Oh, and fuck Joe Lieberman too, while I'm at it.

[calmblueocean]

32. No kidding! Here's a doctor who causes what he says he's preventing!

It's unbelievable that the guy says he cares so much about preventing an abortion that he refuses to prescribe the only medication that would prevent the abortion!

It's like going to the oncologist and having him prescribe you a carton of cigarettes a day.

There's no word for it but malpractice.

[ComerPerro]

30. Sorry, doctor, you shouldn't be practicing medicine

[DarkTirade]

33. Yes, but when it's his daughter I'm sure he'll change his mind.

Then change it right back because his situation was 'different'.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

34. He may be a doctor, but he ain't no brain surgeon

Let me get this straight: Rather than administer a drug that would spare a rape victim from being impregnated by her attacker, thus preventing (hello!) an actual ABORTION, the doctor instead refuses and increases the probability of that very outcome. What am I missing here? :crazy:

[calmblueocean]

44. You got it exactly right.

The doctor is guilty of malpractice in my book, and if I were the rape victim, I'd seriously think about suing him. There are probably thousands of doctors all across the country who think the same thing, and I'm sure this young lady's story is not an isolated incident. Someone needs to wake these doctors up, and maybe a malpractice suit is the only way to do that.

It's just so bitterly ironic that the doctor takes this self-righteous moral stand on a drug that doesn't even work in the way he thinks it does, and that by taking this stand, he actually causes the action he says he was morally bound to prevent. Unbelievable!

[NMMNG]

38. More moral posturing from people who are supposed to be providing care

He obviously was not doing so and shouldn't send this woman (or her insurance company) a bill. If he does she should say paying it is against her religion.

[area51]

46. republinazis

The republinazi party is pro-rape & anti-female; any woman stupid enough to vote pro-nazi should know what she's getting for her vote: slavery.