I think we should also force chuck e cheese to perform abortions.
fun for the whole family!
Instead of doctors we’d have AI controlled animatronics doing the deed.
We have a Catholic hospital here in the city where I live in Ontario. Being publicly funded makes what they do different from the American ones, but despite doing women’s health and obstetrics they don’t do tubal ligation unless it’s approved by their board, so even if you had a planned c section and were planning on having your tubal during the procedure, if you had to have your c section on an emergency basis because you labour early, they won’t do it. It’s so fucked up. It’s a good hospital but come on. It’s 2025, most Catholics use birth control. If you don’t want to do abortions, fine, but a tubal during a c section is really just saving someone a second surgery.
they don’t do tubal ligation unless it’s approved by their board
So they aren’t above doing the procedure entirely? They’re just persnickity about who is “worthy” of receiving the service?
If you don’t want to do abortions, fine
It’s crazy how a life-saving procedure is off-the-table on the “Pro-Life” grounds.
Well I mean what are called therapeutic abortions. Not someone who needs a D and C for tissue that didn’t pass spontaneously or something. The Americans are crazy in that regard. If a pregnancy is nonviable it isn’t therapeutic abortion.
wtf is a catholic hospital? you get wine and crackers while you wait in purgatory?
They add indulgence cost to your hospital bill
Remaining alive: such an indulgence…
I do not currently feel as though I am indulging…
I shall have another beer! Bravo!
Many hospitals are owned by the Catholic Church and are a huge source of income.
Not just the catholics, either. Many flavors of Christianity run hospitals.
It’s a good cover for diabolical greed
That’s all that organized religion has ever been about.
The kind that demon mother teresa ran. Where care is secondary to conversions
Edit: i said conversations. Lol
Faith healin’, money stealin’! Git it all in ONE PLACE!!
She who believed that people suffering was a good thing, actually… Seriously, the more someone learns about her, the more vile she is
the only 2 hospital networks in my area are literally named Trinity and Genesis, very blatant religious connotations there.
Catch some deathbed conversions mostly.
Perhaps Catholic institutions shouldn’t be forced to perform actions against their beliefs, but then they don’t get to use the word “hospital” in relation to whatever their building does.
I feel this should apply to pharmacies too. If you want to have pharmacists that can deny you valid prescriptions from your doctor, then they don’t get to call that building a “pharmacy”. Just like cigarettes there should be a large lettered warning on the door to the establishment informing you that the person inside has indicated they will deny you a prescription if they feel like it. If the pharmacists want to exercise their moral discretion, they don’t get to use the word “pharmacy” for whatever building/business they’re doing it in.
If they aren’t a hospital or pharmacy then they shouldn’t be able to practice medicine.
I mean, they could run clinics. Nothing saying they can’t specialize. Podiatrists don’t perform a lot of abortions, I’d imagine.
Agreed. If you want to be a pharmacist, then be prepared to dispense contraceptives. If that conflicts with your religious beliefs, then you better figure our what you’re going to do with your life before you become a pharmacist.
I simply don’t want religious anything that is essential services.
What the fuck even is a catholic hospital? Praying the pain away? Offering a free confession close to death?
Surely they are not making use of modern medicine based on science that defies their beliefs.
They’re just hospitals. In fact they’re the biggest group of non-profit hospitals in the country. They are generally speaking a very good thing. The main problem as discussed here is their restrictions on reproductive care, which is a huge problem and should not be allowed. It isn’t even like to be employed there you must be Catholic, or even Christian.
deleted by creator
Religion makes some BIG BUCKS so they invest in things like universities and hospitals.
A lot of historical institutions have religious backing.
I’m not saying I support it. I just follow the money. (Tinfoil hat)
Catholicism is not Christian science. They don’t reject science, they just view abortion as ending life. If it weren’t for Catholic hospitals, huge swaths of the US (and much of the developing world) wouldn’t have access to healthcare at all.
They also said abortion up to 5.5 months was good for a very long time and then a random Pope changed it.
(It was Pious I think)
A hospital is just a building and the organization that owns the building.
The real question is, should hospitals be allowed to force or forbid doctors from providing medical care?
A doctor (Catholic or not) should never, and can never, be forced to perform a medical procedure, including abortions. And they also shouldn’t be forbidden from performing a medical procedure.
Hospitals just provide rooms and equipment so that doctors can provide the care that their patients need, within their ability to provide that care.
If a doctor refuses to perform a medically necessary procedure because of his/her religion, as far as om concerned that should invalidate their medical license immediately.
The is a medical as is already you want to cut the amount of practicing nurses and doctors to fit your agenda. It’s a two way street. I don’t think a doctor should be forced to circumcise someone either just because it’s a religious ritual
I don’t think a doctor should be forced to circumcise someone either just because it’s a religious ritual
I’m petty sure most religious rituals are medically unnecessary, and medical doctors ought to be free to refuse to perform them.
Religious circumcision is not a medically required procedure, its a religious procedure from the stoneage that should be outlawed
Right, because you would want to be the patient to undergo a procedure by a doctor that never performs that procedure?
No sane country does this.
Maybe go live in a dictatorship if you like to force people to cut into other people’s bodies.
No, but that person should not be a doctor at all if they cannot prioritize patient health.
Not performing a procedure that you don’t regularly perform is prioritizing patient health.
?
I’m thinking that you missed the point here.
Point being that if you’re a doctor you cannot cherrypick what procedures you’d like to do based off your religious preferences. Science isn’t pick and choose, you take it all or nothing
You don’t understand how medicine works.
A doctor can’t just decide to start doing a new medical procedure. They need to learn and practice. It takes a significant investment. And to be good at a procedure requires doing it often.
Even my dentist referred me to another dentist for a relatively simple procedure, because the other dentist is better at it and does it more often.
For a doctor that is not experienced in performing abortions, doing an abortion would be medical malpractice. If anything goes wrong, and the chance is higher due to lack of experience, they will be sued and they will lose the tort case.
So doctors have to choose what procedures they specialize in. And obviously, nobody who is morally opposed to performing abortions will choose to specialize in performing abortions.
It is a conscious choice and long term commitment to be an abortion providing doctor.
I very much understand that, but it is not what I meant.
Let’s out a hypothetical example, just to make the point. Let’s say that a white doctor refuses to treat a Muslim patient because of his religion. Or let’s say that a Muslim doctor refuses to treat a women, even though he could because his religion doesn’t allow him to do that.
That lady one sort of happened a long time ago in my town
My point is not that a doctor must perform all procedures whether they can or not, my point is that they must perform all procedures to help a patient, irrespective of what they think or fell about that patient.
A nice opposite of my example, and how it should be is that rather famous picture of a black doctor saving the live of a KKK asshole. That is how it’s supposed to be. You are a doctor, you do what you can and you don’t opt out ONLY because you don’t like something about the patient or procedure they need
Yeah, but think your examples through.
Refusing to treat because of a religion is illegal and there is no way for a doctor to justify it.
But being a doctor that only treats men or only treats women is not illegal, and many exist.
My barber only services men.
If he came out and said that he doesn’t cut women because they are inferior or whatever, he would quickly be fined or jailed.
But because he says he specializes in men’s hair, it’s fine.
And maybe he secretly is a misogynist, but there is no way to know.
“do no harm, unless it violated your specific religious ideology” that’s how the oath goes right?
“Do no harm” is not the same as “Do prevent harm.”
Also, if you’re citing the Hippocratic Oath,…
I will not give to a woman a pessary to cause abortion.
The Hippocratic Oath was created to forbid surgery, since it was a provable harm before modern hygienic standards. No one has sworn the original in centuries, but they do swear modernized versions which don’t include such ignorant nonsense.
The Hippocratic Oath was created to forbid surgery,
I will not use the knife […], but I will give place to such as are craftsmen therein.
Wtf? I don’t trust any physician who hasn’t sworn to Zeus!
Fuck Zeus.
Do you trust me as your physician now?
Idk it’s really more about Hermes, what’s your feelings on winged sandals?
You’re trying to sell us shoes aren’t you Herm. We know you’re the protector of thieves and merchants as well as the god of primitive medicine. Anyway yes I’m interested, how much?
should hospitals be allowed to force or forbid doctors from providing medical care?
They provide the facilities, which includes administration and legal and billing. So in that regard, they have to have some kind of say, simply because they need to stock the equipment, train the nurses/MAs, and establish standard protocols for a given procedure. Otherwise, how do you contest a medical malpractice claim?
A doctor (Catholic or not) should never, and can never, be forced to perform a medical procedure, including abortions. And they also shouldn’t be forbidden from performing a medical procedure.
Doctors can and do regularly incur liability if they fail to perform certain necessary medical procedures, particularly in emergency room settings. A doctor that fails to follow protocol can be subject to malpractice. If, for instance, a Christian Scientist doctor refused to provide a blood transfusion to an individual suffering from sever blood loss or a narcotics prohibitionist doctor attempts to do surgery without providing anesthesia, they can get in some serious trouble.
Religious convictions don’t override medical protocols. What’s at issue is the legality of the protocols as they stand. Can a woman whose health is at risk from pregnancy receive an abortion without the doctors incurring criminal liability?
Right now, it appears that State AGs in prohibitionist states are threatening the licenses and freedoms of doctors who would provide life-saving care. Hospital administrators are acting as intermediaries because the hospital itself would suffer legal liability if staff knowingly permitted/facilitated an illegal procedure.
I disagree somewhat. If a doctor is practicing in a situation where an abortion is necessary, it was their duty to not be a doctor if they find that morally repugnant.
This is really it. If a doctor has a moral objection to abortions, maybe gynecology wasn’t the right discipline for them to practice. That’s on them, and they should be upfront about it being a personal moral objection and for them to seek another doctor.
I’m fine with that compromise, because I suspect those doctors are and will remain the minority, and everyone’s rights are preserved.
But if a chief of medicine, or worse, a board of non-doctors, says their hospital won’t perform abortions on religious grounds? Then fuck you, you’re not a hospital, you are a faith-based healing center, and need to be treated as such.
Hospital administration needs to be science-based care and check their religion at the door, especially if they aren’t directly practicing. They shouldn’t be making decisions that directly effect people that they are indirectly related to based upon someone’s interpretation of an old anthology of fables.
That’s fine. Just don’t expect to keep your medical license as you sit around doing nothing as people die of preventable deaths.
If you’re a doctor, your job is to save lives. If you intentionally fail to do that job it shouldn’t be your job.
If a firefighter refused to put out a fire because they didn’t feel like it, they’d be lose their job too.
Imagine I’m a doctor who refuses to prescribe medication because it makes people weak.
How come 90% of these twitter screenshots I see on lemmy are all just witty comebacks to fake opinions that nobody actually holds? This is like those “feminist gets rekt with facts and logic” compilation videos on youtube, but for liberals. Poking fun at strawmen every once in a while is entertaining, but it gets old really quickly.
This is a 100% real opinion a lot of people hold.
Nevermind, I think you’re right. I was confused by the term “catholic hospital”, but I looked it up and apparently a lot of hospitals around the world really do have a religious affiliations.
a woman i nannied for almost died giving birth to both of her sons. when she had the second one, she asked them to tie her tubes while they were doing the c section and they refused due to their religious policies. she had to fully recover from the birth and then find a doctor who would do the procedure, then had to recover again from that surgery.
If they want to have an argument on the Internet they don’t need to make up a bad take; it’s an abundant resource on the web.
Sadly, I have met actual Catholics who believe this.
If y our religion dictates that you not perform life saving procedures, Then you have no business being in medicine.
I rotated through a Catholic hospital while getting my degree in genetic counseling. Our whole job was to give women with pregnancies at high risk of genetic conditions all the information they needed to make an informed decision on how they want to move forward, and we weren’t even allowed to mention the option of abortion. I was very glad when that rotation was over.
I would really like to see someone who is getting their degree or license push back on the requirement to rotate through a religious hospital, on the grounds that it violates the religious freedoms of the students.
If we’re going to have unconstitutional religious freedom laws, we may as well try and use them against our oppressors.
Wow
I thought the term “catholic hospital” was a joke. That doesn’t even make sense to me.
Something like 15% of hospitals in the US are Catholic hospitals.
deleted by creator
My wife had 2 miscarriages in the past few years, the first one almost killed her, she got sepsis and I genuinely thought she was going die for a while. It was around the time that I was hearing a bunch of stories from Texas, we’re no where near there but I remember being so scared that they would just push us out.
As soon as they realized what was happening they were 1000% on it. They had to call a doctor in who showed up within 10 minutes chugging a coffee at 3am. No one hesitated.
Everything I hear makes me tear up a little and appreciate that hospital so much. It’s 45 minutes away from us and there’s closer ones but that’s just where we go now and where we’re having our son in 2 months. I can’t imagine how things would have gone if we were 30 minutes west in a Bible thumping state.
deleted by creator
If they don’t want to perform particular procedures based on their faith then they can call themseves a “Western Faith Therapy Centre”
“Western”? No, thank you.
I was going to suggest “Southern European” as an alternative but when you get down to it, everyone in their canon is from North Africa and the Middle East so maybe “Middle Eastern Faith Therapy Centre”?
If abortion is an option, it is the only option worth considering.
The only kids who should be carried to term are the ones that have been planned and prepared for.
This is my reason for my answer to the pro-choice question. It is only a baby once you have decided to carry it to term. Before that decision it isn’t.
Dual homicide if you kill a pregnant woman who wanted a child. Not a baby when aborting an unwanted pregnancy.
Deny owner class slave labour.
There is no excuse to have more than one kid unless you are able to properly provide for all of them.
I understand being poor with one child though, I don’t understand the need to spread limited resources over multiple children.
Focus on getting family out of poverty first.
There is no excuse
There’s the problem. Instead of letting other people make their own choices, you’re prescribing what they should and shouldn’t do.
If you told me in my face “there’s no excuse to have more than one child” while i want multiple children, i would see it as an assault and would react accordingly (that might include punching you in the face.)
unless you are able to properly provide for all of them.
That’s what we need UBI (Universal Basic Income)
By the way, what you’re saying feels the same as in the 1960 when women were expected to carry children (without being asked, of course). Just as we condemn that today, we should condemn people pushing other people to have fewer children.
That’s what we need UBI (Universal Basic Income)
Isn’t UBI just a way to accelerate inflation? How will that help anyone?
there’s a certain amount of money in the economy. let’s say $1 million.
of that, $500K belongs to the billionaires and $500K to the average people. Which means the population owns half of all.
Now, you distribute another $1 million among the average people.
Now, the billionaires still have $500K, but the people have $1.5 million, which is 3/4, which is more than 1/2, so it’s an improvement.
If people suddenly have more money out of nowhere, shop owners will start raising prices to compensate. So the long-term effect is that how much goods people can afford doesn’t really change, but the value of their savings keeps on dwindling. Unless there is a fault in my logic or an additional policy meant to prevent this, UBI just sounds like a way to make sure people never retire because their savings are made worthless by inflation.
Thank you! Reproductive freedom includes not just access to abortion, but also the choice of how many children (if any) to have. Applying arbitrary restrictions to the number of kids other people can have would be the same kind of controlling garbage.
your loss is our sauce
Same amount of body fluids.
I honestly disagree.
If i’m a programmer working at a company, and that company asks me to write code that would enable autonomous rockets for warfare (like armed drones), i might refuse because i have ethical concerns about it. But i’m still a programmer.
From the view of catholic hospital staff, providing abortions might be murder, and they have ethical concerns about it. They are still a hospital.
Then don’t get a job at a defense company. If you don’t want to provide abortions, don’t get a job at a hospital.
In both your programmer case and the case of the catholic hospital staff member you have a very clear option, you can not work at that facility. Don’t want to write code for military weapons, cool then work somewhere that doesn’t do that. Don’t want to provide abortions at your work, cool then work in a medical facility that doesn’t provide them. Many facilities don’t perform abortions just because they aren’t intended to, such as clinics etc so you should work there.
Your programmer case also doesn’t make sense because extending the metophor you want companies to be allowed to not develop software that is used by the military…they can already do that.
Does refusing to program a drone prevent a cancer patient from receiving treatment? Do these drones prevent organ rupture in ectopic pregnancies? When asked to program armed drones, are you also sitting face-to-face with a person who is suffering or dying because you aren’t actively programming them?
The denial of healthcare involves victims. Nobody’s hurt when you refuse to do a drone-programming job, but witholding a medically-necessary abortion directly results in avoidable human suffering. That’s the key difference that makes these situations incomparable.
Ok but your thing is an actual problem and their thing is a made up non-problem which it is their job and (ironically) sacred hippocratic duty to perform.
The real irony is that, while Hippocrates was not a Christian, the hippocratic oath forbids doctors to perform abortion.
Today, doctors take an amended oath in most countries with a few changes but the original Hippocratic oath tries to instill a reverence for life in the practitioners of medicine.
Rather not, I’d be worried they’d “fuck up” on purpose.
I’d like to believe that the vast majority of doctors care about the lives of their patients and are capable of weighing that against the viability of the fetus.
