It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Newborn Baby Almost Refused Treatment Because She Has Two Moms

page: 1
18
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+7 more 
posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 04:53 AM
link   
Some of you I'm sure remember the lengthy debates her at ATS about this new movement across this great tolerant nation of ours called "Religious Freedom". Only it's not about "Religious Freedom" so much as it is "Religious Discrimination". So far they have been about Wedding Cakes, Wedding Photos and Wedding Ceremonies typically but a question would come up at some point that when asked always got back the reply of "Oh that would never happen." Well, it's happened.

"What happens if someone in the Health Care Industry denies service to a LGBT person using Religious Freedom Laws???" Well, if you're a little baby with 2 mamma's you better have a Plan B because you're Care Provider might bail on ya without warning.

Michigan pediatrician: God doesn’t want me to treat your baby because you’re lesbians


In spite of the fact that they had set up an appointment with Dr. Roi well in advance, they were met by a different physician, who informed them, “I’ll be your doctor, I’ll be seeing you today because Dr. Roi decided this morning that she prayed on it and she won’t be able to care for Bay.”

“We were really happy with her,” she said. “The kind of care she offered, we liked her personality, she seemed pretty friendly. She seemed pretty straight up with us.”

That made the snub by Dr. Roi all the more painful and unexpected, the women said, that their child should face discrimination on her sixth day of life.

“We’re not your patient — she’s your patient,” Jami told Channel 2. “And the fact is that your job is to keep babies healthy and you can’t keep a baby healthy that has gay parents?”


This so called Doctor shouldn't be allowed practice medicine if she can't allow her personal issues to cloud her judgement like this. WTF is wrong with this damn woman! Oh, but she did send them a letter (like a coward) explaining to them why she bailed out on them at the last minute. How professional.



On Feb. 9, the couple received a letter from Dr. Roi that read, in part, “After much prayer following your prenatal, I felt that I would not be able to develop the personal patient-doctor relationships that I normally do with my patients.”

She continued, “(P)lease know that I believe that God gives us free choice and I would never judge anyone based on what they do with that free choice.”


Oh, but you see, that is exactly what you did *SNIP*. You not only judged them, you even judged the baby because of the free choice of it's mothers. That is a whole new kind of low lady. Not to mention the fact that they had already met and talked before this happened but for some reason didn't think about saying anything then.

Here is the Doctors last response.


“My life is taking care of the babies,” she said. “I love my families, my patients. I love my kids. And I have become very close with all my patients.”


Here's mine: "*SNIP* you don't know what Love is and whatever God you think told you it was wrong to care for this baby doesn't know either. I honestly hope at some point in your future you are judged in the same way you did this baby so you know what it's like to be abandoned by someone who is supposed to be there to care for you when you're the most helpless. Maybe your so called God will show you that kind of Love and teach you a lesson."

So what do all the apologists and "Religious Freedom Law" supporters think now???

Is it A-Ok to snub babies because you discriminate against their mothers???

How much worse does it have to get before you at the very least admit this isn't about "Religious Freedom" but plain old "Discrimination"???

 

Mod Note: Profanity/Circumvention Of Censors – Please Review This Link.
edit on 2/20/2015 by Kangaruex4Ewe because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 04:56 AM
link   
It's not okay to snub anyone in need of healthcare.

However manipulating the family structure which is male + female + children is potentially damaging for a child's psyche, in many ways.

Go ahead flame me for my views.

I understand the children of LGB parents will in theory get looked after but there is more to it than practicalities.

I'm not homophobic.
edit on 20-2-2015 by and14263 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 05:00 AM
link   
Ia reply to: mOjOm

Sometimes parents can accpt baby but i dont think the baby can....!



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 05:02 AM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

It's disgusting, I'm a Christian. Whilst I'll always say what God says about lesbian and gay issues. There is zero justification for the mistreatment of anyone. Regardless of any religious leaning, refusing to help a child is at complete odds in my opinion with what Jesus taught.

Completely wrong on a human level and Totally misguided biblically as far as I am concerned.

Regards



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 05:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: and14263
It's not okay to snub anyone in need of healthcare.

However manipulating the family structure which is male + female + children is potentially damaging for a child's psyche, in many ways.

Go ahead flame me for my views.


No flames. You have every right to view "the family structure" however you want. Others have that same right as well even if their version is different than yours or mine.

Studies have shown that having two same sex parents doesn't damage children at all though. Although I'm sure you disagree, but that's what the studies show FYI.

Personally, I think any damage that may occur happens because of the intolerance of those who judge that family rather than the family itself. The child is going to see their parents as all kids do, it doesn't matter if they are gay or straight, black or white, old or young, they are your family and you love them.


I understand the children of LGB parents will in theory get looked after but there is more to it than practicalities.


Not sure what you mean with this last part exactly. What practicalities???



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 05:20 AM
link   
How very Christian of him

I'm sure Jesus is applauding and will reward his loyal behavior.



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 05:24 AM
link   
a reply to: and14263

"damaging" is it in your personal view, you should add that, and maybe emphasize that it is your own view.

Don't judge onto others.

The absolute in every parent-children-relation is trust and caring. The child does not care about what sexuality or gender (different things!) their parents are. If later on there is some bullying or hassling, that is done by bigots and bullys.

Are you a bigot?
Are you a bully?
If you consider saying "NO! OF COURSE NOT! I have only the best for the children in my mind!" - rethink that.



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 05:30 AM
link   
I think your title is very misleading.
At no point was this child refused healthcare, she was just switched from one doctor to another.
To be honest would you want a doctor treating your child who had issues with your lifestyle choices?
Big fuss over nothing.



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 05:41 AM
link   
a reply to: WilsonWilson

That doctor should not put any of his personal feelings into his job.
Don't they take the oath in the usa?.



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 05:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: and14263
It's not okay to snub anyone in need of healthcare.

However manipulating the family structure which is male + female + children is potentially damaging for a child's psyche, in many ways.

Go ahead flame me for my views.

I understand the children of LGB parents will in theory get looked after but there is more to it than practicalities.

I'm not homophobic.


Yes, you are exactly homophobic, because you and I both know that there is absolutely ZERO evidence to back up the nonsense you have just spouted, it's all in the mind of the religious zealot desperate to control the lives of other people.


+1 more 
posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 05:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: ManFromEurope
a reply to: and14263

"damaging" is it in your personal view, you should add that, and maybe emphasize that it is your own view.

Don't judge onto others.

The absolute in every parent-children-relation is trust and caring. The child does not care about what sexuality or gender (different things!) their parents are. If later on there is some bullying or hassling, that is done by bigots and bullys.

Are you a bigot?
Are you a bully?
If you consider saying "NO! OF COURSE NOT! I have only the best for the children in my mind!" - rethink that.


It should also be pointed out that racists screaming about interracial marriage back in the day also claimed that this would damage children and was "unnatural" etc...

Funny that there were also plenty of so-called "Christians" in the USA who had the same views about interracial marriage as currently scream and rant against same-sex marriage.

The world didn't end back then, society didn't collapse, the ranters and preachers of ignorance and hate were proven wrong. The same will happen in this case too, the religious and the ignorant will be proven entirely and completely wrong, laws will continue to change, society will continue to evolve, and eventually these incredibly ignorant cretins will be so few in number they can easily be ignored - as they should be.



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 05:54 AM
link   
a reply to: ManFromEurope

You're right it's my educated opinion. However if there's one area I'm knowledgeable in it's this.

A child needs a father figure and a mother figure, they are two seperate functions. The child's psyche will develop schemas around which the child's development forms. It is important that the child experiences the masculine influences and femenine influences, these must however come from the correct sex. There are strong correlations between what I would say are abnormal behaviors and lack of a father figure.

It's not just about the care they receive, there are other subconscious/nurtured effects of a M+F parenting situation.

Added to this the torment a child will likely receive at school.

I could write a lot about this and perhaps I will once I've gathered enough evidence to answer the "Show me the proof replies I'll get."

Look I know my opinion will rile a lot of people, maybe give me a few days and I'll make a thread on it.

If I am a bigot for believing this then so be it, label me what you will.

I'm no bully.



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 06:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Rocker2013

Okay, I don't expect you to open your mind to this. It is a very difficult concept for someone to come to terms with especially if they are homosexual.

Some reading you could do whilst I develop a thread (I'm at work so I can't do much now):
en.wikipedia.org...

freakonomics.com...

Nothing major in those articles, just some things to get the cogs turning in the right direction.

I'm camp as f**k, honestly if you met me you would see I am pretty camp. Yeah I am a man's man too, fixing cars etc but a large part of me is camp... Why? Because I was brought up in a house full of women... no men.

I was brought up in a house of women with no father. I know the effects of a same sex parent situation.

The effects are not limited to F+F up bringing either. M+M will also have effects.

Like I say, I'll do a thread and you can flame me on there. But you are showing a lack of understanding on the psyche, personality development and children's minds.

EDIT: To say I am homophobic because I don't agree with same sex parenting - that is wrong, really wrong. I have no problem at all with same sex relationships, believe me, no problem at all.
edit on 20-2-2015 by and14263 because: (no reason given)


+2 more 
posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 07:14 AM
link   
a reply to: and14263

* 10 million single Mothers in the USA

* 3 Million LGBT Parents in the USA

Why are the children of LGBT parents more of an issue than the 10 million growing up in a Single Mother household?



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 07:18 AM
link   
a reply to: and14263
Just to check do you realise that neither the wiki page nor the article you linked to actually support the statement you made?
I am sure this was an honest mistake and not an attempt to back up a claim in the hope that no one actually clicks the links.



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 07:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Rocker2013

She got the care she needed, so what's all the fuss about and who's trying to control who?



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 07:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: and14263
Just to check do you realise that neither the wiki page nor the article you linked to actually support the statement you made?
I am sure this was an honest mistake and not an attempt to back up a claim in the hope that no one actually clicks the links.


From the Wiki link:

Whereas the idea of the father complex had originally evolved to deal with the heavy Victorian patriarch, by the new millennium there had developed instead a postmodern preoccupation with the loss of paternal authority — the absence of the father.[19] Alongside the shift from a Freudian emphasis on the role of the father to object relations theory's stress upon the mother, what psychoanalysis tended to single out was the search for the father, and the negative effects of the switched-off father.[20]


Eating disorders expert Margo D. Maine used the concept of "father hunger" in her book Father Hunger: Fathers, Daughters and Food (Nov 1991),[24] with particular emphasis on the relationship with the daughter. Such father hunger, as prompted by paternal absence, may leave the daughter with an unhealthy kind of narcissism, and with a prevalent search for external sources of self-esteem.[25] Maine further examined the longing that all children have for connection with fathers, and how an unmet father hunger influences disordered eating and other mental illnesses.


From the other link:

…we find that adolescent boys engage in more delinquent behavior if there is no father figure in their lives. However, adolescent girls’ behavior is largely independent of the presence (or absence) of their fathers.


But of course unless the exact words written in my post appear in a source word for word then you guys will dismiss the link.

As an example of parent figures effects on the psyche I thought they were acceptable.



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 07:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Bone75




Matthew 18:4-5
4 Therefore, whoever takes the lowly position of this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. 5 And whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me.





Matthew 25:40
40 The King will reply, 'Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.


It seems that Jesus disagrees with you.

edit on 7Fri, 20 Feb 2015 07:29:40 -060015p072015266 by Gryphon66 because: (no reason given)

edit on 7Fri, 20 Feb 2015 07:30:20 -060015p072015266 by Gryphon66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 07:32 AM
link   
a reply to: and14263

Again, what about the ten million single mothers in the USA that out number LGBT parents by 7 million. Do these Children born into single mother households not deserve the same scrutiny and discussion as those children in an LGBT parented household?

If what you are saying is true that every child needs a mother and father, lets start by saving the 10 million in a single mother households and then perhaps your argument against LGBT parents would hold some sway!
edit on 20.2.2015 by flammadraco because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 20 2015 @ 07:34 AM
link   
a reply to: flammadraco

Yes, I believe that the lack of a father figure has an effect on a high percentage of these children brought up in single parent families.

Look at the number of single parent families now vs 1950s.

Now look at the behaviour of children now compared to the 1950s.




top topics



 
18
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join