(no subject)

[primroseburrows]

Excuse me, what century are we living in, again?

How can this be legal?

Comments

[dorrie6.livejournal.com]

I just keep reading the article over and over, waiting to figure out that it's a joke or something. I'm simply horrified. And are there doctors who WANT this?? That casts a very unpleasant light on the healthcare profession for me.

[primroseburrows.livejournal.com]

That casts a very unpleasant light on the healthcare profession for me.

Honey, I'm in the healthcare profession, and I couldn't agree more.

*gets degree in Library Science, STAT*

[dorrie6.livejournal.com]

Ah yes, that's right. So you're probably feeling something similar to what I am for being from Michigan. Heh.

There are no words to express my horror over this. So... it says they can refuse to treat anyone for "moral, ethical or religious reasons"... does that mean that a Catholic could refuse to treat a Jew? Or a Jew could refuse to treat a Muslim? Where does it end??

[dorrie6.livejournal.com]

ps: I reposted this here. I got a little out of hand, perhaps, but... ack.

[primroseburrows.livejournal.com]

Y'know, I was thinking and comparing this to my support of groups such as Nurses for the Rights of the Child, because on the outside, this seems like something that supporters of the Michigan bill would cheer. However, there's a subtle difference here. Refusal to participate in a procedure one finds immoral is quite different than refusal to treat a patient based on their age/gender/sexual orientation/religion/lifestyle is just plain prejudice.

I believe that healthcare providers can refuse to participate in procedures based on their moral opposition to the procedure itself (abortions, circumcisions, etc); however, withholding care based on the patient is wrong in every sense.

I basically said the same thing over on titti's LJ.

franlet is right. This law will set the medical profession back two hundred years.

[dorrie6.livejournal.com]

Yes, that subtle difference is quite huge, I think.

[mawaridi.livejournal.com]

I believe that healthcare providers can refuse to participate in procedures based on their moral opposition to the procedure itself (abortions, circumcisions, etc); however, withholding care based on the patient is wrong in every sense.

Yes, that's exactly what I was thinking. There's a pretty massive difference between the two.

This is just insane. Not to mention terrifying. What next?

[primroseburrows.livejournal.com]

Oh, I dunno. Forced castrations? Geh. The US healthcare system is as FUBAR as the President.