Ill. judge throws out rule on contraception

  • Thread starter Thread starter catharina
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
She might still want to go ahead and take a pill that has dual contraceptive/abortive mechanism of action, but the pharmacist has the right to refuse cooperation with the evil of a mother killing her child. .
See above: no child present. However, my question is: If they still only dispensed condoms from behind the counter, could a pharmacist rightfully refuse to sell them to a gay man because he refuses to cooperate in what he considers evil?
 
I think this is common sense advice. You would have very little sympathy as a nurse if you voluntarily decided to take a job somewhere where you knew you would be unable to assist with some of the procedures due to religious/moral beliefs, and then refused to fulfill your job description.

I’m sorry estebob but I disagree with you. The Catholic nurse’s right to practice her faith and her beliefs (assuming it’s a she) is not greater than the right of the patient to recieve “treatment” that is their legal right if they ask for it. We are required as Catholics to ensure we do not put ourselves into such a position that could lead us to sin therefore I believe a boycott of nurses to not work in certain areas is entirely reasonable.

Just to add - abortion clinics and labour wards tend to be different areas with different staff, so a Catholic nurse could still work at a maternity ward. Also I do not think they perform abortions at the emergency room/accident and emergency wards, unless it is a life-or-death issue and the mother’s life is in danger, and the treatment the mother requires has to be carried out immediately. What scenario did you imagine where it would be impossible for a Catholic nurse to work at an emergency ward?
In the very scenario you describe above (underlined).
We are Catholics. We can NEVER be involved in providing abortions.
 
See above: no child present. However, my question is: If they still only dispensed condoms from behind the counter, could a pharmacist rightfully refuse to sell them to a gay man because he refuses to cooperate in what he considers evil?
In your opinion.

In fact, if no test is given for ovulation,
there could, in fact, be a new life present.
 
Just FYI, that pill isn’t killing any babies, as there isn’t conception in the time frame in which it is taken.
Only if ovulation and conception hasn’t occurred. Without an ovulation test, one wouldn’t know if they are delaying ovulation or preventing implantation. I believe that the morning after pill and plan B can be taken up to 72 hours correct? Conception can certainly happen in that time frame.
 
In the very scenario you describe above (underlined).
We are Catholics. We can NEVER be involved in providing abortions.
I was commenting on a situation in which an abortion would be carried out in an emergency room, not on a situation in which it is permissable for a Catholic nurse to assist in one, so please read my posts carefully.
 
You have a habit of bringing this up " Patient abandonment", Can you provide us with evidence that invoking a conscious clause
has caused a case of patient abandonment?
Personally, I can’t. You know why? Because the nurse does her job as told, to avoid being brought up on patient abandonment charges. Then they complain that their rights were violated later :rolleyes:
The LAW says and these Judges agree, that a Nurse / Doctor / Pharmacist have protection of conscious.
Not in an emergency.
NO one is imposing their beliefs upon another
I think that’s all the patient wants really. 🙂
 
I was commenting on a situation in which an abortion would be carried out in an emergency room, not on a situation in which it is permissable for a Catholic nurse to assist in one, so please read my posts carefully.
I read it again -
still don’t see that you made the distinction.

Believe me - I do read posts carefully.
 
I think this is common sense advice. You would have very little sympathy as a nurse if you voluntarily decided to take a job somewhere where you knew you would be unable to assist with some of the procedures due to religious/moral beliefs, and then refused to fulfill your job description.
Exactly, that’s what I always say. I think it’s easier for us to understand (you and I) because part of our training is not only cultural competence but ethics. A nurse cannot impose her religious views on a patient without risking her job, and that’s the way it is.
I’m sorry estebob but I disagree with you. The Catholic nurse’s right to practice her faith and her beliefs (assuming it’s a she) is not greater than the right of the patient to recieve “treatment” that is their legal right if they ask for it. We are required as Catholics to ensure we do not put ourselves into such a position that could lead us to sin therefore I believe a boycott of nurses to not work in certain areas is entirely reasonable.
Exactly. If one is unable to perform the job, one just shouldn’t have that particular job.
Just to add - abortion clinics and labour wards tend to be different areas with different staff, so a Catholic nurse could still work at a maternity ward. Also I do not think they perform abortions at the emergency room/accident and emergency wards, unless it is a life-or-death issue and the mother’s life is in danger, and the treatment the mother requires has to be carried out immediately. What scenario did you imagine where it would be impossible for a Catholic nurse to work at an emergency ward?
That’s exactly the senario some folks think a nurse, who is already assigned your above hypothetical patient, can just refuse to treat. Sorry folks, but in an emergency situation, you cannot abandon your patient. If you can’t find someone to switch assignments with you, then that patient is your responsiblity and has to be cared for, or you will be rightfully fired, and probably rightfully lose your license. For example, a JW nurse working in the ER CANNOT refuse to perform a blood transfusion on a patient. She can try to find a replacement, but if she doesn’t find a replacement, she has to do it. If she doens’t, she gets fired and she may lose her license. YOUR sensibilities are meaningless when a doctor has ordered an emergency treatment on a patient and has assessed the patient to be at risk of harm or death if a procedure isn’t carried out. You are there to do a job, and you are there to take care of patients as ordered by a physician. If you can’t handle it, don’t work there…or do like the others and just do it and then whine about how your “rights” were violated over the rights of the patient.
 
Exactly, that’s what I always say. I think it’s easier for us to understand (you and I) because part of our training is not only cultural competence but ethics. A nurse cannot impose her religious views on a patient without risking her job, and that’s the way it is.

Exactly. If one is unable to perform the job, one just shouldn’t have that particular job.

That’s exactly the senario some folks think a nurse, who is already assigned your above hypothetical patient, can just refuse to treat. **Sorry folks, but in an emergency situation, you cannot abandon your patient. **If you can’t find someone to switch assignments with you, then that patient is your responsiblity and has to be cared for, or you will be rightfully fired, and probably rightfully lose your license. For example, a JW nurse working in the ER CANNOT refuse to perform a blood transfusion on a patient. She can try to find a replacement, but if she doesn’t find a replacement, she has to do it. If she doens’t, she gets fired and she may lose her license. YOUR sensibilities are meaningless when a doctor has ordered an emergency treatment on a patient and has assessed the patient to be at risk of harm or death if a procedure isn’t carried out. You are there to do a job, and you are there to take care of patients as ordered by a physician. If you can’t handle it, don’t work there…or do like the others and just do it and then whine about how your “rights” were violated over the rights of the patient.
**Sorry, rence, but you are therefore advocting abandoning your FAITH.

Unacceptable for all Catholics - even “nurses.”**
 
Exactly, that’s what I always say. I think it’s easier for us to understand (you and I) because part of our training is not only cultural competence but ethics. A nurse cannot impose her religious views on a patient without risking her job, and that’s the way it is.

Exactly. If one is unable to perform the job, one just shouldn’t have that particular job.

That’s exactly the senario some folks think a nurse, who is already assigned your above hypothetical patient, can just refuse to treat. Sorry folks, but in an emergency situation, you cannot abandon your patient. If you can’t find someone to switch assignments with you, then that patient is your responsiblity and has to be cared for, or you will be rightfully fired, and probably rightfully lose your license. For example, a JW nurse working in the ER CANNOT refuse to perform a blood transfusion on a patient. She can try to find a replacement, but if she doesn’t find a replacement, she has to do it. If she doens’t, she gets fired and she may lose her license. YOUR sensibilities are meaningless when a doctor has ordered an emergency treatment on a patient and has assessed the patient to be at risk of harm or death if a procedure isn’t carried out. You are there to do a job, and you are there to take care of patients as ordered by a physician. If you can’t handle it, don’t work there…or do like the others and just do it and then whine about how your “rights” were violated over the rights of the patient.
And thus the dangers of becoming so wedded to ones profession the rationalize going against their faith. This thread started out with a story about judges throwing out an unjust implementation of workplace requirements on people of faith. It is now morphed into rationalizations for why this okay for Catholics to support abject evil as long as their profession demands it.

I have yet to see anybody present a scenario that would require a devout Catholic to precipitate in abortion whether it be chemical or surgical. What I have seen a lot of rationalizations on why would be okay for Catholic to do so-rationalizations are church does not accept.
 
I think the problem here is that at some point, a secular democracy like we have that doesn’t at some level hold judeo-christian morality as immutable and foundational for society, Christians will be forced to act contrary to their conscience.

If I’m a muslim and do not want to let a seeing eye dog into my cab, should I have the right? As far as i’m concerned, nobody has the right to force their mal-formed consciences on other people. At some point, the natural law must have precedence over individual consciences. And who defines the natural law–the Catholic church of course!!!

The sooner the church upholds traditional catholic teaching on the correct separation of church and state the better. This may mean in my opinion that a critical analysis of Vatican II documents in light of tradition is called for to better define what those documents really say.
 
I think this is common sense advice. You would have very little sympathy as a nurse if you voluntarily decided to take a job somewhere where you knew you would be unable to assist with some of the procedures due to religious/moral beliefs, and then refused to fulfill your job description.

I’m sorry estebob but I disagree with you. The Catholic nurse’s right to practice her faith and her beliefs (assuming it’s a she) is not greater than the right of the patient to recieve “treatment” that is their legal right if they ask for it. We are required as Catholics to ensure we do not put ourselves into such a position that could lead us to sin therefore I believe a boycott of nurses to not work in certain areas is entirely reasonable.

Just to add - abortion clinics and labour wards tend to be different areas with different staff, so a Catholic nurse could still work at a maternity ward. Also I do not think they perform abortions at the emergency room/accident and emergency wards, unless it is a life-or-death issue and the mother’s life is in danger, and the treatment the mother requires has to be carried out immediately. What scenario did you imagine where it would be impossible for a Catholic nurse to work at an emergency ward?
Maybe that makes it a bit clearly for you catherina, I do wish that people would stop misreading my posts and finding a little reason to lecture on pro-life issues or trying to accuse me of not being pro-life enough/at all.

At the end of the day, I know what I meant. If you did not understand what I meant, then I would politely like to suggest you misread my post.
 
I have yet to see anybody present a scenario that would require a devout Catholic to precipitate in abortion whether it be chemical or surgical. What I have seen a lot of rationalizations on why would be okay for Catholic to do so-rationalizations are church does not accept.
Actually, you have. Remember the recent Arizona case in which the woman had pulmonary hypertension and was being treated on an emergent basis in a Catholic hospital? Her doctor examined her and found her to be in need of an abortion in order to relieve the phsyiological stresses that the pregnancy was causing, due to underlying pulmonary hypertension. The ethics committee was consulted, and sided with the doctor. The procedure was done on an emergent basis as they ruled out transferring her to another facility because she was too sick.

Everyone not involved in the case can banter back and forth over whether this woman had a true emergency, or whether or not the case was warranted even to begin with. But outside of everyone’s own personal world, there’s a medical world, and the medical world gives the responsibility of calling emergencies to the doctors assigned to patients. That woman’s doctor called an emergency, and ordered an emergency treatment and stated that she would have died without the procedure, and had the backing of an ethics committee. The fact is, a woman wound up in the ER of a Catholic hospital, and an emergency procedure resulting in terminating the pregnancy was done to help her recover and live longer, and they had doctors and staff present to be involved and carry out the doctor’s orders, in agreement with the ethics committee. Whether the staff was Catholic or not, they had to take care of their patient and stabilize her. They are not allowed to sit back and watch her die. They know this. That’s why they treated her as ordered and took the heat later.

With regards to pharmacies and prescriptions for contraceptives/plan B, I don’t know any doctors who just wouldn’t send the patient to a pharmacy who dispenses contraceptives/plan B. That is, if the doctor didn’t give it to the patient in the office to begin with. Doctors have a list of pharmacies who give patients a hard time, and give that info to the patient. And pharmacists who give their pharmacies a hard time because they don’t want to do their job just dont’ get hired (if they’re honest in the interview) or get fired later for not doing their job. They’ll whine about it later, sure, but they’ll be gone from that pharmacy.

In the ER, a nurse who has a problem dispensing plan b to a rape victim should be able to find someone willing to give Plan B to the woman. If a nurse anywhere creates too much of a problem and patients and other staff complain about her, the hospital will get rid of her. They’ll just cut her hours, switch her days, move her to another department or make her life miserable until she leaves. That’s why the best place for Catholics nurses to work is in Catholic institutions or low-risk areas (low risk meaning a low risk of being assigned something that will conflict with Catholic teaching).
 
Exactly, that’s what I always say. I think it’s easier for us to understand (you and I) because part of our training is not only cultural competence but ethics. A nurse cannot impose her religious views on a patient without risking her job, and that’s the way it is.

Exactly. If one is unable to perform the job, one just shouldn’t have that particular job.

That’s exactly the senario some folks think a nurse, who is already assigned your above hypothetical patient, can just refuse to treat. Sorry folks, but in an emergency situation, you cannot abandon your patient. If you can’t find someone to switch assignments with you, then that patient is your responsiblity and has to be cared for, or you will be rightfully fired, and probably rightfully lose your license. For example, a JW nurse working in the ER CANNOT refuse to perform a blood transfusion on a patient. She can try to find a replacement, but if she doesn’t find a replacement, she has to do it. If she doens’t, she gets fired and she may lose her license. YOUR sensibilities are meaningless when a doctor has ordered an emergency treatment on a patient and has assessed the patient to be at risk of harm or death if a procedure isn’t carried out. You are there to do a job, and you are there to take care of patients as ordered by a physician. If you can’t handle it, don’t work there…or do like the others and just do it and then whine about how your “rights” were violated over the rights of the patient.
I see nothing here that goes against being Catholic, perhaps someone else can enlighten me?

If you know that abortions happen at an abortion clinic and you are a Catholic, do not choose to work there. If you know that it is likely that an “emergency” abortion may occur at an A&E unit, don’t work there (although I can safely assure people that that will never happen, except in the cases of ectopic pregnancies and the usual treatment is to remove the tube as well as the foetus that would not survive). If you know that at a sexual health clinic, condoms and other contraception would be given out - don’t work there. You cannot as a Catholic walk into an environment you disagree with morally and then say “I demand that I have the right to work here as well as the right to refuse to give treatment to the majority of patients in this department so I shall sit and read magazines for all of my shift!”

Sorry, but the hospital has the right to decide which procedures it carries out.
It has a right to employ staff who will carry out those procedures.
You have a right to your own religious beliefs.
Your right to practice your religion and work where you choose is not more important than the employer’s right to hire someone who can do the legal job required. Otherwise, they are wasting their money paying the salary of someone who is not working/fulfilling their job description.
An employer has a right to fire an employee who is not working to the standard required.
Period.
 
It is preposterous, truly off-the-wall, to suggest that
the poor poor poor nurses are subject to situtations that
are so far removed from those faced by other Catholics.

As a social worker, I lost three jobs after becoming a whistle blower.
Why did I become a whistle-blower? There was no other way to elicit
change in the agencies that were mistreating clients. I’ll add that one
of the agencies was a Catholic one.

When an agency decides that it can treat minority-clients, children
and the elderly in these cases, in a way that is LESS than protective,
non-discriminatory and totally un-Christian - and in each case, against
the laws in place, someone must ACT on behalf of those who deserve
protection, even if one knows one’s job becomes at risk.

In my situation I have NO REGRETS.
One does what one must do.

That is a call of our faith.
It is a grace that goes with being Catholic.

I understand all too well, rence, what it is to stand in
oppostion to the common path. You are terrifically naive to
toot away about the ‘situtation’ for nurses. The situation for
Catholic nurses is identical to the situation for all Catholics.

To imply otherwise is to LIE -
or to delude yourself on a rather grand scale.
 
Maybe that makes it a bit clearly for you catherina, I do wish that people would stop misreading my posts and finding a little reason to lecture on pro-life issues or trying to accuse me of not being pro-life enough/at all.

At the end of the day, I know what I meant. If you did not understand what I meant, then I would politely like to suggest you misread my post.
Wish away then.

Your post seems to ASK what sort of ER job would be unsuitable for a Catholic nurse.
I answered: one that required the nurse’s assistance in an abortion.

Case closed.
 
Personally, I can’t. You know why? Because the nurse does her job as told, to avoid being brought up on patient abandonment charges. Then they complain that their rights were violated later :rolleyes:
Can you provide us evidence of this, please?

Because you are not only protected by conscious clause, but by Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination by public and private employers on the basis of religion.
Not in an emergency.
The emergency being what? This hypothetical only could exist if there were no other nurses / doctors present…no time to get one.

So a victim of rape let’s say ] is admitted to the emergency room…staffed by 1 doctor and 1 nurse. Patient requests Plan B. Doctor recuse himself …c’mon. He doesn’t abandon the patient - What does he do?

Now, you act like this doesn’t happen in Catholic Hospitals…A rape victim admitted - Patient requests Plan B…Are you trying to say Catholic Hospitals don’t see these cases?

Because of your illogical logic of a nurse, with a conscious, should only work in a Catholic Hospital - you must mean that Catholic Hospitals abandon the patient.

If you can’t convince me that you don’t have choices - how can you expect to convince grwnups?

If you are looking for me to validate that you have no choices …
 
Wish away then.

Your post seems to ASK what sort of ER job would be unsuitable for a Catholic nurse.
I answered: one that required the nurse’s assistance in an abortion.

Case closed.
As the person who wrote the post, I can assure you that you are the one who is mistaken. What my post seems to say is exactly what is said, without the need for someone to read into it.

Case re-opened, new conclusion reached, jury agreed, case closed and shelved.
 
I think this is common sense advice. You would have very little sympathy as a nurse if you voluntarily decided to take a job somewhere where you knew you would be unable to assist with some of the procedures due to religious/moral beliefs, and then refused to fulfill your job description.

I’m sorry estebob but I disagree with you. The Catholic nurse’s right to practice her faith and her beliefs (assuming it’s a she) is not greater than the right of the patient to recieve “treatment” that is their legal right if they ask for it. We are required as Catholics to ensure we do not put ourselves into such a position that could lead us to sin therefore I believe a boycott of nurses to not work in certain areas is entirely reasonable.

Just to add - abortion clinics and labour wards tend to be different areas with different staff, so a Catholic nurse could still work at a maternity ward. Also I do not think they perform abortions at the emergency room/accident and emergency wards, unless it is a life-or-death issue and the mother’s life is in danger, and the treatment the mother requires has to be carried out immediately. What scenario did you imagine where it would be impossible for a Catholic nurse to work at an emergency ward?
Again, here is your post.
At the end is your question.

You state that: abortions [if/when done] at the emergency room/accident and emergency wards, it is a life-or-death issue and the mother’s life is in danger, and the treatment the mother requires has to be carried out immediately.

You ask: What scenario did you imagine where it would be impossible for a Catholic nurse to work at an emergency ward?

I respond: in that very situation! A Catholic nurse can NOT be willing to be a part of any abortion, “emergency treatment” or otherwise. It is precisely that simple. What part of that don’t you understand?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top