Planned Parenthood of Central Iowa Takes a Line From Chicken Little's Playbook
(Des Moines Register, 8 January 2009)
When I was little, my mother told me the tale of Chicken Little, a children's fable that teaches listeners not to believe everything they hear. In case you don't remember, Chicken Little, after being hit on the head by an acorn, believed the sky was falling and created a panic as she spread the word.Chicken Little came to mind when I read Jill June's column about the right of conscience for health-care workers ("New Bush rule undercuts quality health care," Dec. 23). According to June, CEO of Planned Parenthood of Central Iowa, "[I]f a doctor, nurse or receptionist disagrees with your choice of services, your lifestyle or your beliefs, he or she can deny you care..."
While that may scare Henny Penny, it's misleading. The regulations prohibit discrimination against those who object to taking part in certain medical procedures in federally funded programs. So, an employee can't deny someone care; the employee simply can decline to participate. Thus, a Catholic nurse cannot be required to assist with an abortion, and may not be fired, reprimanded, or demoted for that refusal.
While that may scare Henny Penny, it's misleading. The regulations prohibit discrimination against those who object to taking part in certain medical procedures in federally funded programs. So, an employee can't deny someone care; the employee simply can decline to participate. Thus, a Catholic nurse cannot be required to assist with an abortion, and may not be fired, reprimanded, or demoted for that refusal.
There is ample reason for the adoption of this rule. Medical personnel are increasingly facing moral challenges that pit deeply held religious and moral beliefs against the demands of a secular society. For example, a California doctor was sued when she refused - for reasons of conscience - to artificially inseminate a single lesbian. Although the doctor had referred the patient to another physician, the state Supreme Court held the doctor had no right of conscience to refuse the procedure. In many states pharmacists are required to dispense abortifacients, despite their moral beliefs opposing abortion. And in three states, individuals now have the right to ask their doctors to assist them in committing suicide.
Legislatures, medical boards and courts are under increasing pressure to require medical and pharmaceutical professionals to cooperate in procedures that many consider unethical or immoral. That was the finding of the Department of Health and Human Services: "There appears to be an attitude toward the health-care professions that health-care professionals and institutions should be required to provide or assist in the provision of medicine or procedures to which they object, or else risk being subjected to discrimination. Reflecting this attitude, in some instances the standards of professional organizations have been used to define the exercise of conscience to be unprofessional, forcing health-care professionals to choose between their capacity to practice in good standing and their right of conscience."
When you read the rationale behind the rule and its text, you will find there is nothing about allowing receptionists to examine your lifestyle to determine if you are worthy of medical care, nor is there anything that prohibits you from obtaining the care you have a right to receive. It only protects the medical professional from being forced to provide a service to which he or she has a moral objection.
Legislatures, medical boards and courts are under increasing pressure to require medical and pharmaceutical professionals to cooperate in procedures that many consider unethical or immoral. That was the finding of the Department of Health and Human Services: "There appears to be an attitude toward the health-care professions that health-care professionals and institutions should be required to provide or assist in the provision of medicine or procedures to which they object, or else risk being subjected to discrimination. Reflecting this attitude, in some instances the standards of professional organizations have been used to define the exercise of conscience to be unprofessional, forcing health-care professionals to choose between their capacity to practice in good standing and their right of conscience."
When you read the rationale behind the rule and its text, you will find there is nothing about allowing receptionists to examine your lifestyle to determine if you are worthy of medical care, nor is there anything that prohibits you from obtaining the care you have a right to receive. It only protects the medical professional from being forced to provide a service to which he or she has a moral objection.
Unfortunately, in a pluralistic society containing a variety of values and belief systems, it becomes too easy to use hyperbole to camouflage facts and demonize those who disagree. What is true, however, is that there are scores of medical professionals who hold values and beliefs that run contrary to those espoused by Planned Parenthood.
The mantra of Planned Parenthood has always been "choice." But choice is meaningless unless offered to all. The choice to follow one's conscience is the most basic moral right, and no one has a right to prevent another from so acting.
The mantra of Planned Parenthood has always been "choice." But choice is meaningless unless offered to all. The choice to follow one's conscience is the most basic moral right, and no one has a right to prevent another from so acting.
(Source: Iowa Right to Life)
Labels: Planned Parenthood
posted by Al @ 1:46 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home