Why Catholic's can NOT be doctors or pharmacists

[FullOfThought]

the example you gave is of a person prescribing hormones to treat pathology, not a person prescribing contraception.

Oh right… thank you… yes, you are correct. However, you may have missed what I posted before:

Soo this is my main issue with ABC. Most pills don’t stop ovulation but implantation. Which means you could conceive and be pregant, but the pill prevents the egg implanting and so a miscarriage occurs. This is why I hate birth control. Unless the person is abstaining I would never prescribe BC.

In medical school they teach that most BC pills allow the egg to become fertilized, and I believe that this is life. Then by preventing implantation this is a misccariage/abortion.

Even though it is hormonal treatment… if the hormone given is BC pills, which it usually is as this is the most FDA recognized treatment, it still has this effect on eggs and fertilization.

 

[Schieffelin]

Yes I did thank you. I sent an email with my questions and contact information - wanted to ensure they would actually have answers for my questions.

I also asked Physicians for Life about organizations such as Tepeyac, and they explained that they are a private organization so they can choose their ‘niche’. They are not physicians who work for major hospitals as they would not be able to refuse ABC.

I really appreciate your help! Thank you

You are welcome and I hope they are helpful to you. It sounds like you’ve already gotten a partial answer from Physicians for Life. I don’t know much about the medical community, but it was my understanding that most (or at least many) physicians are in private practice rather than working directly for a hospital.

 

[In_Training]

Abstaining from sexual relations while not married also prevents pregnancy.

That’s what I’m doing now, and gradually getting better at it. But I don’t have any criticism for those who do use ABC, whether it’s for BC or something else.

I’ve been told by a doctor that a woman’s body can spontaneously abort several times throughout her life, even if she’s not on meds and never has taken ABC. She doesn’t even know it’s happening. I’ve just been around people who pick on ABC because they hate women, and always criticize women for being promiscuous (even the virgins at my church group), so obviously I’m biased and feel that people should be able to use any healthcare/preventative care measure they want. Just because I don’t personally agree with it doesn’t mean I should intervene and stop them from doing it. I’m not Jesus, I can’t judge people like that.

 

[Bookcat]

I suggest you get some better information. Some contacts for you:

The National Catholic Bioethics Center

Catholic Medical Association

Physcians for Life

Pharmacists for Life

And we go to a pro-life- NFP only Catholic Doctor and Practice…

 

[PatriceA]

I already have switched to it. I never have thought of it as ‘pseudo science’. Our family physician has always been a chiropractor, and for the record massage therapy is fundemantal in sport recovery, whiplash, circulatory problems, headaches… I could go on! I love my massage therapist!

I appreciate some people don’t see/understand the advantages of chiropractic medicine but many do! I am happy with my career choice, feel free to visit me once I’ve qualified… I may be able to change your mind

Same here. I love my chiropractor, has helped with various sports injuries when traditional medicine could not. I don’t think my orthopedic surgeon would have recommended seeing a chiropractor if it was “pseudo science”. In fact, more and more traditional medical professionals do recommend chiropractic services to their clients if the situation warrents the suggestion. My priest even goes to the same chiropractor.

 

[mini_me640]

Oh right… thank you… yes, you are correct. However, you may have missed what I posted before:

In medical school they teach that most BC pills allow the egg to become fertilized, and I believe that this is life. Then by preventing implantation this is a misccariage/abortion.

Even though it is hormonal treatment… if the hormone given is BC pills, which it usually is as this is the most FDA recognized treatment, it still has this effect on eggs and fertilization.

But the Church permits people to use BC pills to treat a pathology, even of the person is married and sexually active. So if the Church allows that usage, why is it a problem?

 

[Corki]

This is correct, but if you can safely control the symptoms while avoiding surgery, why not do it? Depending on the surgery, the risk of surgery can be higher than taking OCPs.

The main reason **not to **is that most of these women want to have children some day. If you only treat the symptoms with birth control pills, the woman will be no better off when she needs to go off them and try to become pregnant. It will also be more difficult to become pregnant. Not to mention that even further down the line, as menopause approaches, the risks go up even more from the pills but the underlying condition has still not been addressed which means a higher chance of surgery (such as hysterectomy) which is more risky in older than younger women and/or a rougher time with menopause.

It’s a “quick fix”. That’s not to say that it sometimes might not be the best option. But far too many physicians use it as the **first **option, or even the only option presented to a woman, which is just wrong.

 

[LSK]

Thank you, but I am well aware of all of those organizations. I am looking for the general publics opinions.

ok well here is my opinon. Your premise is incorrect.

It is perfectly possible to be a physician or a pharmacist and a faithful Catholic. I know many of them. The do not prescribe drugs or treatment that goes against Catholic teaching.

 

[Yeoman]

I already have switched to it. I never have thought of it as ‘pseudo science’. Our family physician has always been a chiropractor, and for the record massage therapy is fundemantal in sport recovery, whiplash, circulatory problems, headaches… I could go on! I love my massage therapist!

I appreciate some people don’t see/understand the advantages of chiropractic medicine but many do! I am happy with my career choice, feel free to visit me once I’ve qualified… I may be able to change your mind

Your family physician is not a chiropractor, as chiropractors are not physicians. That’s not even the question, nor is it a question that message therapy has value, it clearly does. But, in terms of the science, I am sorry, but chiropractic practice just lacks it. It may have some value, but the science for it is not there. And it doesn’t matter whether you think of it as a pseudo science, it matters whether or not there is science behind it.

What, I suppose, does that have to do with Catholic morality? Probably nothing. But, if a person is switching from one field of medicine into what they believe to be another, for moral grounds, perhaps (or perhaps not) there is some need to determine the scientific truth behind the new field of study. I may be way, way off base (and I know you are sincere), but I’d feel a little queasy about abandoning medicine in favor of a field whose claims to be medicine are shaky, as if that’s not true, it puts us in sort of a weird area, representations of the truth wise.

Put another way, it isn’t true that a person must compromise their moral values if they practice medicine as an MD. It also wouldn’t be true that a person would have to compromise their moral values as a chiropractor either. But if a person claims things for any one field, that it isn’t entitled to, that’s risks being dishonest, which none of us should be, particularly if we do so through blinding ourselves to the dishonesty.

Again, I know that any time a person talks about chiropractors people rush in to defend the field. But, being pretty familiar with the field, it seems based mostly on claims rather than science. Sorry. Not intending to offend, but to encourage objectivity.

 

[THP]

I contacted Physicians for Life again… they cannot make it clearer that a physician AND pharmacist must provide contraception when needed. If for example a patient comes in with endometrious and asks for the pill to help control pain, and because it is the ONLY non surgical treatment proven to help this condition, a physician MUST prescribe it. There is no personal opinion, religious rights etc of the Doctor taken into account.

This is not correct. Patients cannot demand their physician treat them in a certain way. I guarantee you no orthopedic surgeon is going to prescribe birth control pills for anything. If he did and there was a complication it would be malpractice because it is out of his scope of practice.

What if the patient is 36 years old and smokes and has endometriosis. That is an absolute contraindication to OCPs and the patient cannot demand it because in the opinion of the physician the risk is too great, even if the patient is willing to accept the risk.

The group you are contacting is giving you wrong information.

 

[THP]

The main reason **not to **is that most of these women want to have children some day. If you only treat the symptoms with birth control pills, the woman will be no better off when she needs to go off them and try to become pregnant. It will also be more difficult to become pregnant. Not to mention that even further down the line, as menopause approaches, the risks go up even more from the pills but the underlying condition has still not been addressed which means a higher chance of surgery (such as hysterectomy) which is more risky in older than younger women and/or a rougher time with menopause.

It’s a “quick fix”. That’s not to say that it sometimes might not be the best option. But far too many physicians use it as the **first **option, or even the only option presented to a woman, which is just wrong.

This is correct. One of the challenges of treating GYN problems is that the treatments often prevent pregnancy which is not a good option if the patient wants to get pregnant. But not all patients want to get pregnant and are willing to accept symptomatic relief to avoid surgery.

The point is, care needs to be individualized between the patient and her doctor and needs to account for both the patient’s and doctor’s value systems. No one is denying that OCPs have side effects but they are just not that dangerous in young healthy women. I just don’t want those reading this board to disregard their doctor’s advice.

 

[agapewolf]

No one is denying that OCPs have side effects but they are just not that dangerous in young healthy women. I just don’t want those reading this board to disregard their doctor’s advice.

What you are saying here,…by saying “its just not that dangerous to young women” is worse than people warning about it. You are normalizing something that you have no facts on.

In the cancer studies done originally, they omitted ALL women under 45 from the study. The pill is actually WORSE for women 18-25 who have never been pregnant for causing breast cancer.

 

[THP]

You are normalizing something that you have no facts on.

Be careful on what you assume about people whom you have never met.

In the cancer studies done originally, they omitted ALL women under 45 from the study. The pill is actually WORSE for women 18-25 who have never been pregnant for causing breast cancer.

I don’t have the time nor the energy for a proper lesson on statistics but just realize there is a big difference between relative risk, odds ratio, and absolute risk. Like every decision made between a patient and her doctor they are balancing the risks and benefits of any given treatment with the expected outcome. Your crusade against OCPs can lead to harm for some women.

 

[tvdxer]

I’ll warn you right now, this has the ability to be contraversial! I do not mean to insult anybody, so please take this with a pinch of salt!

So, I am wondering what your opinion is of the statement that Catholic’s cannot be pharmacists, doctors or any medical career that provides contraception to the public.

My story- I am in medical school and I transferred to become a chiropractor as I completely disagree with contraception under ALL circumstances… I completely believe the Church teachings about contraception. During my journeys I asked many doctors if they had prescribed contraception, and they all said that they had not only provided contraception to many people but had also referred patients to other physicians/clinics for IVF, STERILITY and ABORTIONS. Even practicing as a family physicans or choosing to specialize you still encounter these often, and due to laws in America you cannot refuse care to patients, and referals are considered to be providing these services.

Here is my question:* Under the assumption that a person follows and believes the Catholic Church teaching, knowing that being a pharmacist/physician that you WILL have to provide contraception to patients and/or refer patients for abortons, sterility and IVF treatments, do you think that it is acceptable for a Catholic to be in these careers?*

Thank you,
FOT

I think Catholics must be in all careers except those which are obviously immoral (i.e. porn star). That said, there is A LOT of temptation in A LOT of career paths.

I think neuro-oncology provides an excellent example. Neuro-oncologists guide the treatment of brain tumors and prescribe chemotherapy and other supportive drugs to their patients. No harm for the soul in that, right?

But then you have patients of fertile age, in relationships (and let’s not kid ourselves - most unmarried adults in romantic relationships are sexually active), who need chemotherapy. Partners undergoing treatment, no matter what their sex is, “need” to use contraception (according to the inserts on chemotherapy drugs) - or the fetus could be deformed. In our society, using contraception in such a case would not only be seen as moral but obligatory. What is a faithful Catholic neuro-oncologist going to tell his married patients?

Likewise, pregnancy, in some studies, has been found to accelerate brain tumor growth. Additionally, treatments can interfere with fetal development. Hence in one patient’s story I read that abortion was a “medical recommendation”. How is a faithful Catholic going to navigate around that obstacle?

Some medical occupations would not seem to present as many compelling occasions of sin. I imagine that a podiatrist or an orthopedic surgeon or a audiologist would not be as perilous an occupation as a gynecologist or an obstetrician.

 

[Yeoman]

Having already expressed my doubts on the scientific validity of chiropractic practice, in that the science for its claims just aren’t there, what I’d also note is that if a person looked for an analogous medical field, it would be an orthopedic practice.

No orthopedic specialist ever prescribes birth control pills for anything.

Therefore the entire analogy is flawed. A person cannot claim that they took up a generally less regulated, and frankly at least somewhat suspect, orthopedic occupation on moral grounds when the much more regulated, much more educated, physician equivalent involves no moral conundrums.

What I think that this might point out is that there are clear moral issues, and then there are ones that are not nearly as clear as we might personally think. Here, there really isn’t a moral issue at stake as the moral problem is easily avoided, and if the solution is to take up an orthopedic specialty, that is available within the medical field for a MD, although it is much harder to obtain that position as it requires much more education.

While I would not suggest it is at play here, conversations of this general type also counsel us to be careful of personalizing desires on the basis that they’re in line with God’s desires or commands. Again, I’m not arguing that anyone here has made that statement, but it’s an ancient moral trap to equate a personal secular desire with God’s will, and that can indeed even be very morally dangerous. Indeed, some of the most shocking religious cults had their probable origins that way, and many people routinely justify immoral acts that way (which I’m not saying, once again, is the case here).

 

[FullOfThought]

Your family physician is not a chiropractor, as chiropractors are not physicians. That’s not even the question, nor is it a question that message therapy has value, it clearly does. But, in terms of the science, I am sorry, but chiropractic practice just lacks it. It may have some value, but the science for it is not there. And it doesn’t matter whether you think of it as a pseudo science, it matters whether or not there is science behind it.

Again, I know that any time a person talks about chiropractors people rush in to defend the field. But, being pretty familiar with the field, it seems based mostly on claims rather than science. Sorry. Not intending to offend, but to encourage objectivity.

The field does not need defense. To enter into my program I had to have 3.7GPA in an undergraduate degree of Biomedical sciences, I have to maintain a GPA of 3.5 to maintain place in the program. I will graduate with a PhD in Chiropractic medicine, and with more in class hours the MD’s - these qualifications are much higher than entering medical schools… I have some friends that by the pure blessing of God they got into med school based on their ability to cram for the MCAT!

Also, you are completely wrong about chiropractors as family physicians. MOST chiropractors are family physicians and they ARE physicians that specialize in neuromusculoskeletal and spinal conditions. They can do minor surgeries, deliver babies, as well as adjustments.

Side note - The top resident at Cancer Treatment Centers of America last year was a ND/DC and the last Albert Schweitzer Fellowship was awarded to a Chiropractor.

 

[FullOfThought]

No orthopedic specialist ever prescribes birth control pills for anything.

Therefore the entire analogy is flawed. A person cannot claim that they took up a generally less regulated, and frankly at least somewhat suspect, orthopedic occupation on moral grounds when the much more regulated, much more educated, physician equivalent involves no moral conundrums.

What I think that this might point out is that there are clear moral issues, and then there are ones that are not nearly as clear as we might personally think. Here, there really isn’t a moral issue at stake as the moral problem is easily avoided, and if the solution is to take up an orthopedic specialty, that is available within the medical field for a MD, although it is much harder to obtain that position as it requires much more education.

Like I’ve said repeatedly, there are SOME specialties that don’t prescribe contraception, but getting to be in those positions means that you have to take other jobs that do!! It takes 10 years of residency & fellowship to be a orth surg. I personally would not hold off having a family, homeschooling, huge debt, not seeing my family, to end up with a job that I would not want just to be a MD that didn’t have to prescribe ABC.

Physicians for life said that only working at a private organization as a family doctor can a physician choose not to prescribe contraception! And I won’t get my MD until this is changed and firm.

 

[PaulinVA]

Physicians for life said that only working at a private organization as a family doctor can a physician choose not to prescribe contraception! And I won’t get my MD until this is changed and firm.

So, are you saying that Catholic hospitals, who account for 1/3 of all (name removed by moderator)atient stays in the US, would force you to prescribe birth control?

 

[FullOfThought]

So, are you saying that Catholic hospitals, who account for 1/3 of all (name removed by moderator)atient stays in the US, would force you to prescribe birth control?

I know!! That’s exactly what I said!! Apparently!

I went to undergrad at a catholic university and my doctor suggested I went on BC due to cramps… I always thought they weren’t allowed! My experience compared to my research seems so conflicting. Looking forward to hearing back from some family anti BC clinics!

 

[PaulinVA]

I know!! That’s exactly what I said!! Apparently!

I went to undergrad at a catholic university and my doctor suggested I went on BC due to cramps… I always thought they weren’t allowed! My experience compared to my research seems so conflicting. Looking forward to hearing back from some family anti BC clinics!

I am flabbergasted. Really? Well, the Catholic Hospital Association is liberal.

But, really, your scenario is licit - taking birth control for period regulation and not contraception.