In Theory: Should religion hold sway over medical treatments?

[Padres1969]

So you want to reap the benefits of the faith of the people who founded the hospital, and want to tell them how to run it and how to spend their money. Why not just force your way into the medicine cabinet and take whatever drugs you want? It’s not robbery or theft if you leave a check on the counter.

How to spend their money? Don’t you mean the patients money? Between the tax breaks hospitals get, the public support they get, the money the patient would be paying both personally and through insurance…

 

[SyroMalankara]

How to spend their money? Don’t you mean the patients money? Between the tax breaks hospitals get, the public support they get, the money the patient would be paying both personally and through insurance…

Let me guess, all about free choice, voting for Hilary/Bernie, etc… except when it disagrees with you…

 

[Padres1969]

So shoddy priests and bad examples are why we should all be that way?

So Mercy affiliated with Scripps and kept their founders’ ideals - and you not looking into it, assumed that it was not Catholic and found out when having to deal with them. What’s the problem?

The reason that hospital is there for you is because of the founders’ religious beliefs - would you prefer to be treated at Walmart?

I think your thinking on the matter is not looking at the larger picture.

No I assumed that one of the only 2 Level 1 trauma centers in the county would be able to provide the full range of medically and legally available treatments to save people brought through their doors.

 

[Padres1969]

Let me guess, all about free choice, voting for Hilary/Bernie, etc… except when it disagrees with you…

Not at all. As I said, individuals are more than welcome IMO to hold to their personal beliefs. Where I find fault is when we ascribe individual rights to corporations. And fact is these “health systems” are large corporations.

As for your statement itself. Why would I be for “free choice” and then not like it when someone’s choice doesn’t agree with mine? That’s an oxymoron if I’ve ever seen one. As for who I’m voting for… it’s not going to be a member of a major party that’s for sure. But if you like one of the major candidates, more power to you.

 

[SyroMalankara]

No I assumed that one of the only 2 Level 1 trauma centers in the county would be able to provide the full range of medically and legally available treatments to save people brought through their doors.

What percentage of people were denied any treatments in the Level1 TC due to the Catholic obligations of the Hospital? How many were not “saved”?

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

I was reading comments on an article recently where the people said that Catholics have no place even running hospitals (due to the stance on sterilization and abortion) and I thought “You have no idea how many places wouldn’t even have a hospital if it weren’t for Catholics.”

Sometimes I think Catholics should have commercials like the Mormons do to help people see the good the Church does in the world.

That people can’t see the benefit of having more doctors than less doctors, even if certain doctors will not perform a certain procedure, shows the radical kind of disposition some are inclined for. I do not know what the benefit here would be or the argument which some would use, other than doctors have no rights against the will of the patient.

 

[Michael68]

No I assumed that one of the only 2 Level 1 trauma centers in the county would be able to provide the full range of medically and legally available treatments to save people brought through their doors.

Is tying tubes or abortion part of a trauma center? I think not

 

[SyroMalankara]

Not at all. As I said, individuals are more than welcome IMO to hold to their personal beliefs. Where I find fault is when we ascribe individual rights to corporations. And fact is these “health systems” are large corporations.

That’s not what the Constitution states. That’s your interpretation, quite a limited view and prevents the free exercise of religion. Freedom of Religion is more than being free to “worship”.

Judge: California Hospital Doesn’t Have To Do Tubal Ligation
nbcnews.com/news/us-news/fight-over-tubal-ligation-heads-court-california-n496516

A California Catholic hospital is not engaging in sex discrimination by denying a woman’s request for the sterilization procedure known as tubal ligation, a San Francisco judge said in a tentative ruling.

Superior Court Judge Ernest Goldsmith said in his decision Wednesday that Rebecca Chamorro could get the procedure at another hospital, and that Mercy Medical Center’s policy against sterilization on religious ground also applies to men.

Health care provider Dignity Health, which operates Mercy Medical and 38 other hospitals in California, Nevada and Arizona, says the tubal ligation sought by Chamorro is not medically necessary and would violate the hospital’s right to freedom of religion.

“The jurisprudence is unequivocal: A Catholic hospital may prohibit sterilization procedures that violate the core principles of the hospital’s faith,” attorneys for Dignity Health wrote in a court filing.

Attorneys representing Chamorro in her lawsuit were set to appear before Goldsmith on Thursday to try to change his mind and issue a preliminary injunction.

Chamorro’s suit is part of a growing clash over birth control and abortion health care coverage. Dozens of U.S. Roman Catholic dioceses, charities and colleges have sued in federal court over the contraceptive coverage required under the federal Affordable Care Act.

Several evangelical nonprofits have also sued, arguing some of the birth control methods covered under the law are tantamount to abortion.

 

[Padres1969]

Is tying tubes or abortion part of a trauma center? I think not

You may think not, and you’re probably not wrong in most situations, but you’re also not a doctor. I’d rather it be up to the doctor to decide the course of treatment for his patient and not be limited in how he can save their life within legal means. Particularly in situations where a patient didn’t have a choice on where they were treated.

 

[cycleman]

What is the reluctance to posting warnings?

Informed consent is one of the cornerstones of medical practice.

Clearly, the denial of certain OB/GYN services is significant and should be clearly communicated by the institution.

 

[SyroMalankara]

As for your statement itself. Why would I be for “free choice” and then not like it when someone’s choice doesn’t agree with mine? That’s an oxymoron if I’ve ever seen one.

So if me, a pharmacist, a doc, and a nurse start a clinical in Wyoming and we all choose to not do abortions or sterilizations - then?

What you’re getting at will lead to something like this:
Swedish court rules midwives must perform abortions
anglicanmainstream.org/swedish-court-rules-midwives-must-perform-abortions/

So free choice equates to the doctor, pharm, nurse etc being threatened with losing medical licensing if not complying in any manner. There goes freedom of the individual as well.

 

[SyroMalankara]

You may think not, and you’re probably not wrong in most situations, but you’re also not a doctor. I’d rather it be up to the doctor to decide the course of treatment for his patient and not be limited in how he can save their life within legal means. Particularly in situations where a patient didn’t have a choice on where they were treated.

That hypothetical is so rare as to be almost insignificant, not a good case law. Unless there are statistics to back these cases up.

 

[Padres1969]

So if me, a pharmacist, a doc, and a nurse start a clinical in Wyoming and we all choose to not do abortions or sterilizations - then?

What you’re getting at will lead to something like this:
Swedish court rules midwives must perform abortions
anglicanmainstream.org/swedish-court-rules-midwives-must-perform-abortions/

**So free choice equates to the doctor, pharm, nurse etc being threatened with losing medical licensing if not complying in any manner. **There goes freedom of the individual as well.

See that’s a different situation. You’re talking about individuals expressing their beliefs. Frankly I’ve no issue with that, and I’d argue the Swedes went too far.

 

[SyroMalankara]

Where does the individual end and the corporation begin? If the 4/5 people I mentioned earlier formed an LLC, does that mean they now must perform tubal ligations and abortions?

 

[Michael68]

What is the reluctance to posting warnings?

Informed consent is one of the cornerstones of medical practice.

Clearly, the denial of certain OB/GYN services is significant and should be clearly communicated by the institution.

Catholic hospital, trauma center should be your first clue

 

[Padres1969]

Catholic hospital, trauma center should be your first clue

As I said above, a great many people don’t know what that means. And again, that assumes it’s listed anywhere prominent that an institution IS Catholic.

 

[Padres1969]

Where does the individual end and the corporation begin? If the 4/5 people I mentioned earlier formed an LLC, does that mean they now must perform tubal ligations and abortions?

It would likely depend on what their LLC is formed for. Is it simply because they’re going to be opening their own little doctor’s office? Are they forming it as part of joining a large hospital as a sub organization? Etc… There is a line to be had and it would need to be defined clearly.

 

[SyroMalankara]

As I said above, a great many people don’t know what that means. And again, that assumes it’s listed anywhere prominent that an institution IS Catholic.

Usually when a patient checks in, or an employee starts working they are given a packet of stuff. In there I guarantee it tell you all you need to know. If it’s an emergency and specifically excludes something this hospital does, the ambulance will take the patient to the other place.

 

[Padres1969]

Usually when a patient checks in, or an employee starts working they are given a packet of stuff. In there I guarantee it tell you all you need to know. If it’s an emergency and specifically excludes something this hospital does, the ambulance will take the patient to the other place.

If only that were always the case. Can’t tell you how many times my family nurse complained that all the “other places” in San Diego County put themselves on bypass (meaning they aren’t taking any incoming patients via ambulance) even when not full up, and patients end up at Scripps Mercy (in large part due to Mercy almost never putting itself on bypass as they want to take in as many as they can beyond even their capacity to handle, and not for altruistic reasons unfortunately).

 

[Iron_Donkey]

I have to admit, I find the concept that a hospital can have a right to freedom of religion a bit disturbing along the same lines as corporate person hood. I understand the idea of individual doctors being able to express freedom of religion, but a hospital is not a person. It shouldn’t be extended the same rights we grant individual citizens.

But it is run by people who have those rights, and who decided that they want to run an organization to do good.

Deciding that as soon as you start working with other people (form an organization) you are no longer able to follow your conscience is troubling.