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.

 

Pediatric nurse sues Winnebago Co Health Dept after losing job for her beliefs

page: 5
18
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 03:49 PM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

I looked up that bill, did you??




Synopsis As Introduced
Amends the Health Care Right of Conscience Act. Makes changes in the Section concerning findings and policy. Defines "access to care and information protocols" and "material information". Provides that notwithstanding any other law, a health care facility, or any physician or health care personnel working in the facility, may refuse to permit, perform, assist in, counsel about, suggest, recommend, refer for, or participate in health care services because of a conscience-based objection only if the refusal occurs in accordance with written access to care and information protocols designed to ensure that (1) the patient receives material information in a timely fashion; and (2) the refusal will not impair the patient's health by causing delay of or inability to access the refused health care service. Provides that nothing in the Act shall be construed to prevent a health care facility from requiring that physicians or health care personnel working in the facility comply with access to care and information protocols. Makes other changes in Sections concerning: (i) discrimination by employers or institutions; and (ii) liability.

www.ilga.gov...


seems to me that the only time it would force anyone into an abortion is when the refusal doesn't "impair the patient's health by causing delay of or inability to access the refused health care service."
ya know like when a patient comes in with a tubal preganancy they might have to do a little more than just sit around and wait till the tube is compromised to the point where it's endangering the women's life?




posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 03:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: TerryDon79
...
That happens in EVERY job, but you twisted it to fit your "euthanising babies" fallacy.


It is not a fallacy... You want to believe a human fetus is not human that's your problem... Medical doctors and nurses in Germany during the reign of the NAZIS were also even forced against their will to do experimentation on minorities, including Jewish people and it was the law...

Just because it is a law doesn't make it right...

If suddenly your job included killing human fetuses and babies you would do it gladly it seems...



posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 03:54 PM
link   
a reply to: vlawde

She did NOT take a job that wanted her to do thing against her personal beliefs. She took a job that she wanted, she held that job for several years.

It wasn't until later they forcefully changed her job description to make her do things against her personal beliefs. She was forced to do the new job, or get fired. This is not exactly legal.



posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 04:06 PM
link   
A lot of people don't seem to know why a nurse such as this one would not accept to be forced into using a drug that can cause abortion.

Plan B is less effective and a drug called "Ella" or "Ulipristal acetate" which can induce an abortion, has also been prescribed.


...

Plan B One-Step and its generic forms (like Next Choice One Dose and Take Action) are available directly on the shelf with no restrictions. ella is available by prescription only.
ella is more effective than progestin-only pills like Plan B One-Step and Take Action, particularly on the 5th day after sex, when progestin-only EC may not be effective.
ella is effective closer to the time of ovulation than Plan B One-Step or Take Action, and this is the time when women are most at risk of pregnancy and most likely to be having sex.
ella may be more effective for overweight or obese women.
...

ec.princeton.edu...



Ann Pharmacother. 2011 Jun;45(6):813-5. doi: 10.1345/aph.1Q248. Epub 2011 Jun 10.
Ulipristal acetate: contraceptive or contragestive?
Keenan JA1.
Author information

1Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, University of Tennessee Medical Center, Knoxville, TN, USA. jkeenan@tds.net

Abstract

Ulipristal acetate is the first selective progesterone receptor modulator approved for postcoital contraception in the US. It appears to be significantly more effective in inhibition of ovulation than other forms of emergency contraception. However, ulipristal acetate is structurally similar to mifepristone, and several lines of evidence suggest that a postfertilization mechanism of action is also operative. This mechanism of action is considered to be contragestive versus contraceptive. Ulipristal acetate administration is contraindicated in a known or suspected pregnancy; however, it could quite possibly be used as an effective abortifacient.Health-care providers should inform patients of the possibility of both mechanisms of action with use of this drug.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...



...
contragestive adjective Referring to an agent or action which prevents gestation—e.g., by preventing implantation of a fertilised egg.

noun An agent (technically an abortifacient—e.g., RU-486) which blocks progesterone receptors in the endometrium. Without progesterone, the uterus cannot sustain pregnancy, precluding successful gestation.
Segen's Medical Dictionary. © 2012 Farlex, Inc. All rights reserved.
...

medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...


edit on 11-6-2016 by ElectricUniverse because: add and correct comment.

edit on 11-6-2016 by ElectricUniverse because: correct comment.



posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 04:08 PM
link   
a reply to: WeAre0ne

actually she objected to being trained to do the job.
and is this really the only example where employees have been removed from the job they were hired to do just to be moved into a job they really didn't want to do? I don't think so, and if it's a reason to sue the company then there are a few companies I should have sued.

but, I do believe that unless that state law I gave a link to above says differently, all they legally had to do was to try to accommodate her. which they did try to do, they offered her a position as food inspector and one in a nursing home. she refused the food inspector job and the nursing home had a policy about hiring family members of current staff.



posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 04:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

originally posted by: TerryDon79
...
That happens in EVERY job, but you twisted it to fit your "euthanising babies" fallacy.


It is not a fallacy... You want to believe a human fetus is not human that's your problem... Medical doctors and nurses in Germany during the reign of the NAZIS were also even forced against their will to do experimentation on minorities, including Jewish people and it was the law...

Just because it is a law doesn't make it right...

If suddenly your job included killing human fetuses and babies you would do it gladly it seems...


Wow. Another fallacy. You're getting your full quota in today, aren't you?

BTW, this also has nothing to do with the story in your op.



posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 04:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar

actually she objected to being trained to do the job.
...


She objected to be trained to possibly induce abortions with a drug?... Good for her...



posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 04:12 PM
link   
a reply to: TerryDon79

And that's literally forcing her to perform an abortion. She never signed up for it, in fact she worked with kids and that was her job. Many work places will cater to an employees religious beliefs but from this story sounds like her bosses didn't even try, instead they threatened to make her a god damn food inspector?

As I said, I hope she wins, then sues the state over their stupid new bill and finds a better place to work.
edit on 11-6-2016 by Swills because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 04:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: TerryDon79
...
Wow. Another fallacy. You're getting your full quota in today, aren't you?

BTW, this also has nothing to do with the story in your op.


Another analogy showing you that just because it is a law doesn't make it right and doctors and nurses have been forced in the past to perform experiments and even kill people because they were seen as inferior?...

A lot of "progressives" think that a human fetus is not human... Which is a fallacy because they are in fact human fetuses...



posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 04:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: TerryDon79

And that's literally forcing her to perform an abortion. She never signed up for it, in fact she worked with kids and that was her job. Many work places will cater to an employees religious beliefs but from this story sounds like her bosses didn't even try, instead they threatened to make her a god damn food inspector?

As I said, I hope she wins, then sues the state over their stupid new bill and finds a better place to work.


That's not forcing her to do anything. She had a choice, do it or not. Both have consequences.



posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 04:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

originally posted by: TerryDon79
...
Wow. Another fallacy. You're getting your full quota in today, aren't you?

BTW, this also has nothing to do with the story in your op.


Another analogy showing you that just because it is a law doesn't make it right and doctors and nurses have been forced in the past to perform experiments and even kill people because they were seen as inferior?...

A lot of "progressives" think that a human fetus is not human... Which is a fallacy because they are in fact human fetuses...


Which, again, is you pushing your agenda.

You've twisted the story to be anti abortion, anti baby euthanasia, forcing people do things and a bunch of other fallacies.

You have yet to even address anything relevant with the story.



posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 04:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
A lot of people don't seem to know why a nurse such as this one would not accept to be forced into using a drug that can cause abortion.

Plan B is less effective and a drug called "Ella" or "Ulipristal acetate" which can induce an abortion, has also been prescribed.


Yes, some of us know, if you read all my posts on this threads you'll realize I do know. Just as I know and said to you many times that no nurse is forced to do anything, if you work in a family planning/abortion clinic then it's part of your job description. If it goes against your beliefs then you go and work in another setting. There are plenty of jobs in her county.



posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 04:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: TerryDon79

Which, again, is you pushing your agenda.


It certainly isn't me pushing an "agenda"... Are human fetuses human?... yes they are since they are fetuses of homo sapient(humans)...


originally posted by: TerryDon79
You've twisted the story to be anti abortion, anti baby euthanasia, forcing people do things and a bunch of other fallacies.

You have yet to even address anything relevant with the story.


And the story is about certain counties forcing nurses and doctors to perform abortions... I didn't make anything up, it is what the story itself states...

Drugs like ella can induce an abortion. I even presented proof...

The only ones twisting this, and trying to push an agenda is you among others who want to force your beliefs on other people who don't share them...



posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 04:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

originally posted by: TerryDon79

Which, again, is you pushing your agenda.


It certainly isn't me pushing an "agenda"... Are human fetuses human?... yes they are since they are fetuses of homo sapient(humans)...
And many studies would disagree with you. Many would also agree with you. Still has nothing to do with the story apart from you inserting your personal, religious agenda.


originally posted by: TerryDon79
You've twisted the story to be anti abortion, anti baby euthanasia, forcing people do things and a bunch of other fallacies.

You have yet to even address anything relevant with the story.
I have. And I said it multiple times. You just chose to ignore them, obviously.


And the story is about certain counties forcing nurses and doctors to perform abortions... I didn't make anything up, it is what the story itself states...

Drugs like ella can induce an abortion. I even presented proof...

The only ones twisting this, and trying to push an agenda is you among others who want to force your beliefs on other people who don't share them...

Blah blah blah. No one forced here to do anything.
edit on 1162016 by TerryDon79 because: Stupid quote tags



posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 04:32 PM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

if you are talking about providing birth control to patients, then ya, she was trained for it..
but isn't that one of the major things that family planning centers are doing.... providing birth control and advice on how to control your family size?

she even mentions birth control as one of the things she is objecting to in her complaint.



posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 04:44 PM
link   
a reply to: TerryDon79

Here's a very relevant questions.

If someone is "forced to do something", how can they refuse to do said something? Isn't the point of being forced to do something, to actually do it?

If she refused to do it, she couldn't have bee forced to do it.



posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 04:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus

originally posted by: eNumbra

originally posted by: vonclod
a reply to: windword

So the "abortion" here is less than 1st week?, a bunch of cells the size of a pinhead..hardly a human baby yet


B-but, life begins at impure thoughts.
This has to be the most ridiculous post I've ever seen on the entire website.


Is it really though? The whole idea of spilling the seed being a sin comes to mind. Sperm isn't people, yet masturbation is a sin to some people. The "where do we draw the line" game always comes up when abortion is discussed; we can all play this game, and we can take it to its absurd conclusions to make a point.



posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 04:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: DupontDeux
And obviously she was not. That she was given a choice is precisely the premise of her case - she just finds the choice unreasonable.

That the WANTED her to do something is not the same as that she was FORCED to do it. You might find it unfair - and it might BE unfair - but no way does that constitute her being forced.

It just does not.


When you are given a choice of keeping your job as a nurse in the county you live by being forced to administer drugs that can induce an abortion it is still a mandatory decision on the part of the employer. A county in the U.S. can cover an area from around 150 sq Miles to 600+sq miles. So essentially she might have to move to another county, or even another state, or she chooses to give drugs that can induce abortions. That is forcing someone... If you are being forced to do something or you get fired and can't work on that county anymore in hundreds of square miles you are being forced to make a decision to leave your job and leave the county, or perform something you don't agree with.



originally posted by: DupontDeux
Edit ( to clarify my abortion stance. And rant a bit) : I do by the way find the abortion date limits in the U.S. disgusting - most states have a limit at 24-26 weeks, 3 states at 28 weeks and 9 does not have an upper limit at all!


Well, you think it ends there. Here is a transcript from Hillary Clinton stating that a fetus and even a human baby on the due date having no human rights and the mother can decide even as she is about to have the baby to have an abortion...

You can watch the video and see she states a fully grown fetus hours when is about to be born still has no constitutional rights.


...
Faris first referenced Clinton’s comments Sunday from Meet the Press when she said that “the unborn person doesn’t have constitutional rights,” before asking, “At what point does someone have constitutional rights, and are you saying that a child on its due date just hours before delivery still has no constitutional rights?

Under our law, that is the case,” Clinton responded while nodding her head. “I support Roe v. Wade because I think it’s an important statement about the importance of a woman making this most difficult decision with consultation by whom she chooses … and under the law, and certainly under [Roe v. Wade], that is the way we structure it.”

Clinton’s view indicates that she supports abortions during the entire duration of pregnancy, including partial-birth abortions.
...

freebeacon.com...



BTW, we even had Liberal Supreme court Judge Gimsburg state that on her view Roe V. Wade was about : “Frankly, I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we dont want to have too many of,”
www.blacknews.com...


edit on 11-6-2016 by ElectricUniverse because: add and correct comment.



posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 04:59 PM
link   
a reply to: TerryDon79

You still don't understand... She had a job in pediatrics as a nurse for 18 years, and 2 years ago they changed the rules and now want to force doctor and nurses to perform abortions or not work as doctors and nurses anymore... That is still being forced to do something. She liked being a nurse, but she had to leave because they were forcing her to do something that wasn't her job to begin with...

edit on 11-6-2016 by ElectricUniverse because: add comment.



posted on Jun, 11 2016 @ 05:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

originally posted by: TerryDon79

Which, again, is you pushing your agenda.


It certainly isn't me pushing an "agenda"... Are human fetuses human?... yes they are since they are fetuses of homo sapient(humans)...
And many studies would disagree with you. Many would also agree with you. Still has nothing to do with the story apart from you inserting your personal, religious agenda.


originally posted by: TerryDon79
You've twisted the story to be anti abortion, anti baby euthanasia, forcing people do things and a bunch of other fallacies.

You have yet to even address anything relevant with the story.
I have. And I said it multiple times. You just chose to ignore them, obviously.

]And the story is about certain counties forcing nurses and doctors to perform abortions... I didn't make anything up, it is what the story itself states...

Drugs like ella can induce an abortion. I even presented proof...

The only ones twisting this, and trying to push an agenda is you among others who want to force your beliefs on other people who don't share them...

Pro choice activists know what they are doing they know these drugs are abortifacient and they know that they are forcing people including pro life ppl into doing this. This admisinistration knew what they were doing when they pushed the ACA and and subsequent mandates. It's just that simple. The part that you didn't get is why and the rockefelkers the club of Rome and designers of agenda 21 have the answers for you if only you would open your eyes that you may see.
edit on 11-6-2016 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-6-2016 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join