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.

 

U.S. HealthCare Workers Are Free To Follow Their Beliefs and Conscience Again.

page: 4
30
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 19 2018 @ 03:00 AM
link   
Just what I've always wanted, for someone like Jehovah's Witnesses with their retarded religious blood phobia to be able to say "F# this patient, I'm not helping" when I'm bleeding heavily & in dire need of patchwork and a transfusion!

I've actually gone to the ER for profuse blood loss just shy of requiring a transfusion before (not an injury, girl parts doing their monthly thing a little too well) Had any nurse tending to me at the height of that been a JW & pulled the anti-blood horsecrap, I'd have mustered the strength to beat a bitch. You TREAT, you do NOT get to get PICKY.




posted on Jan, 19 2018 @ 03:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Nyiah


If they didn't do that to people for 230 years, before the 2011 rule took effect, it's not likely that they'll let you die needlessly when the 2011 rule is removed.
edit on 1/19/2018 by carewemust because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2018 @ 03:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Nyiah


If they didn't do that to people for 230 years, before the 2011 rule took effect, it's not likely that they'll let you die needlessly when the 2011 rule is removed.

If they weren't doing it before, then why was there ever a need to make a law saying otherwise?

Answer: Because it was being done to many other people under other circumstances and with other religious excuses. THAT is why it was needed.

Maybe we should consider prohibiting the religious from working in medicine, unless they contractually agree to suspend any "religious hangups". Part sarcasm, part serious.



posted on Jan, 19 2018 @ 03:07 AM
link   
a reply to: dogstar23


Since an entire Civil Rights division was created within Heath and Human Services to help healthcare workers in this country who feel that they're being pressured by their bosses to do what they object to doing, I'd say it's a pretty significant issue in that field.



posted on Jan, 19 2018 @ 03:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Nyiah

The Obama Administration was a rule-making machine. A lot of them were not needed, and most of them were not wanted. That's why they're being scaled back, or totally eliminated.

Only Congress can get rid of some of the burdensome regulations...like the requirement that everyone has government-approved health insurance, or pay a big $$ fine.

But the majority can be scaled back or eliminated the same way that Obama's Administration created them... by Rule Making, and Executive Order.



posted on Jan, 19 2018 @ 03:16 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

Then they should go be sunday school teachers..do you think they go into the job blind, after years of schooling, not knowing what it entails?? dont apply for a job that hurts your frail sensibilities.
Give me a mother fing break..you guys and your obsession with Obama.
edit on 19-1-2018 by vonclod because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2018 @ 03:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Nyiah

The Obama Administration was a rule-making machine. A lot of them were not needed, and most of them were not wanted. That's why they're being scaled back, or totally eliminated.

Only Congress can get rid of some of the burdensome regulations...like the requirement that everyone has government-approved health insurance, or pay a big $$ fine.

But the majority can be scaled back or eliminated the same way that Obama's Administration created them... by Rule Making, and Executive Order.


This was not needed?? I'm just going to leave you with a 12 year old article I read when it was published way back when. Always figured bookmarking it would come in handy some day.
www.nbcnews.com...

Read the article start to finish and try telling us again getting picky about what you do for a patient based on your personal crap is ok.



posted on Jan, 19 2018 @ 03:31 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

So does this mean they can’t be fired for not doing their job?



posted on Jan, 19 2018 @ 03:50 AM
link   
a reply to: MOMof3

if that's the case then we will see other organizations use this new law as a defense. will we see police not helping certain citizens because of their beliefs, or maybe the law that requires a person to help another person in need can have some asterisks in the definition...



posted on Jan, 19 2018 @ 05:02 AM
link   
So religious people are free to impose their personal beliefs upon other people who might not share those beliefs?

Well that's not freedom is it. That's allowing one group of people to impose their personal beliefs onto everybody else.



posted on Jan, 19 2018 @ 05:03 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

Have you forgotten why this rule was made in 2011? People were denying healthcare based on religious belief and certain states were making laws that would protect these people from any kind of legal reprisal. Obama didn't just create this out of nowhere. It was in response to what was happening at that time.



posted on Jan, 19 2018 @ 06:24 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcalibur254

Now now. Let’s not confuse “forgotten about” with “didn’t care because Trump good Obama bad.”



posted on Jan, 19 2018 @ 06:52 AM
link   
So you mean an ER doc can decide to not treat you because you are a Trump supporter?? Awesome! Maybe this IS a good thing.

I swear to God, if Obama had cured cancer Trump would roll it back.



posted on Jan, 19 2018 @ 06:56 AM
link   
Religion has poisoned the entirety of society. People should not take positions where they may be called upon to do something not within their skydaddy bloodgods rules. Religiosity should preclude ANYone from any public office or position. Period.

This is a detriment to our country.



posted on Jan, 19 2018 @ 07:09 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

I thought y'all paid for your medical services in the States so I don't see the problem?
Market forces, businesses will still continue to provide abortions and transgender services.
Big old fuss about nothing, just find a medical centre which doesn't employ fundamentalist Christians lol



posted on Jan, 19 2018 @ 07:14 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

I guess all those Jewish doctors can refuse to treat white supremacists.

Cool.



posted on Jan, 19 2018 @ 11:14 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

Nope, this is not okay, just like the whole Kim Davis thing in KY who was refusing to issue marriage licenses to gay couples because it conflicted with her staunch religious beliefs.

See, the logic here is simple: When you accept employment somewhere, you personal beliefs about that which you are paid to do mean little-to-nothing, depending on your job description. You don't just get to say, "I'm not going to do that because it's against my beliefs," and continue being employed at that place.

Either you willingly adapt because you willingly accepted employment (knowing the scope of the job), or you have some personal f**king integrity and you seek employment elsewhere.

This is not a "freedom thing," as some have called it, its a responsibilities thing. Employment is not a right, nor is it guaranteed--if you can't step up and do your job, you should either be fired or step aside and let someone get paid to do the job properly.

ETA: I must note that I'm all for businesses being able to limit the scope of their services, but not individual employees simply because they believe something isn't okay. If you're doing a job where things "arent' okay" with your religion or conscience, you need to seek other employment, plain and simple.
edit on 19-1-2018 by SlapMonkey because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2018 @ 11:19 AM
link   
a reply to: CornishCeltGuy

But you don't live here--and it is a big deal, because individual employees who willfully accepted employment under a certain job description should not be able to rewrite the job description (and in this case, put people's lives at possible risk) simply because of a deeply held belief.

The employee can seek employment somewhere else, but the patient shouldn't be forced to search hospitals, especially in emergency situation, that will provide the service that they want/need.



posted on Jan, 19 2018 @ 11:30 AM
link   
a reply to: SlapMonkey

Fair one

I just didn't imagine it would cause shortages of services anywhere for people. But thinking bible belt n all that it could be a major issue for some folk.



posted on Jan, 19 2018 @ 11:37 AM
link   
a reply to: CornishCeltGuy

I have lived in the Bible Belt for many years, and I will tell you there truly are some religious crazies out there--when I lived in Tennessee, there was a street corner in the town where there would always be 3-5 old ladies holding signs saying "Honk for Jesus" and the like.

That by itself is fine, but what isn't fine is that they were reported on numerous occasions to go into a nearby restaurant and start convulsing and speaking in tongues, making a big spectacle and causing concern and an uncomfortable situation for the diners.

These types of people do exist, and they work in all types of industries, including healthcare. Now, I'm not saying, at all, that these ladies would assert "beliefs" and not to their job if they were healthcare employees, but I'm just saying that the possibility is a real concern in some areas. And it's not just religious people who do this, but that's just an example since you cited the Bible Belt.



new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join