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: 8
30
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 21 2018 @ 11:19 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

Trump and his followers are idiots.




posted on Jan, 21 2018 @ 12:19 PM
link   
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

what I take from both articles about the one story is this...
the doctor's opinion was that the women could die unless the procedure was done.
the hospital considered it a category 2 emergency, meaning the procedure would have to be done within 6 hours.
both of these, have the responsibility and qualifications to base such a opinion on....
what is unclear to me, is just who is making the judgement that it wasn't even a cat. 2 emergency??
I am gonna take the opinion of the doctor and the hospital on this, and what it tells me is that she had a life threatening situation unless the procedure was done within the 6 hours.
there is no indication as to just how much pain the women was enduring, there is no indication as to weather they had already prepped the women for the procedure... sedation or whatever... before she came on the scene and decided no, her religious beliefs should be a good enough reason to delay a life saving medical treatment!
but hey, if you are willing to admit that in order to actually protect the healthcare providers right to act according to their moral, religious, their conscious, those catholic hospitals would also have to allow their nurses and doctors the freedom to follow the same when these kinds of emergencies crosses their path... I will leave you alone about. otherwise this has nothing to do about people's right to follow their conscious and is only another law promoting the most extreme views of the pro-life!



posted on Jan, 21 2018 @ 02:08 PM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

The complaint in the lawsuit says that the hospital should have had time within 6 hours to find another qualified nurse to perform this abortion.
Perhaps in light of this as a case for biomedical ethics, hospitals can have some alternative procedural guidelines so as not to force someone to perform a late second trimester abortion, which likely would have been and was quite gruesome.

Why do people on the left consistently refuse to take into consideration all points of the argument? Its not even just religious grounds. Its a live baby. There are two lives at stake.



posted on Jan, 21 2018 @ 02:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: richapau
a reply to: carewemust

Trump and his followers are idiots.


And you got two stars for this post? Secularism has brought amoral ideas into play. The public has been brainwashed to believe that secular humanism and scientific theory reign supreme and are superior. Interestingly, even the signers of the Humanist Manifesto admitted that the so called secular humanism is a religion of its own. It really constitutes its own belief system which is rooted in moral relativity.
Again, I have to point you to the fact that Biomedical Ethics is a branch of study and policy of its own, and to just call people idiots for their side of the ethical debate to me shows a lack of awareness.
edit on 21-1-2018 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2018 @ 03:20 PM
link   
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

and, if that six hours assessment was a little off and it was a shorter time span?? and it the patient was in extreme pain, should she really have to suffer needlessly, while they searched for a replacement?




Perhaps in light of this as a case for biomedical ethics, hospitals can have some alternative procedural guidelines so as not to force someone to perform a late second trimester abortion, which likely would have been and was quite gruesome.


and perhaps the catholic hospitals can find alternative procedural guidelines that involve more than just throwing the patient into an ambulance and transferring them to the closest secular hospital without their medical records also, like letting the doctors in their hospital who feel that transferring their patient is endangering their health or life??




Why do people on the left consistently refuse to take into consideration all points of the argument? Its not even just religious grounds. Its a live baby. There are two lives at stake.

why can't some right to lifers recognize that their denial the abortion is sometimes a necessary medical procedure is risking the life of the mother?

but my main point is that if the hospital policies cannot force some medical professionals to perform a procedure, like abortion because it goes against their conscious, then hospitals shouldn't be allowed prevent doctors to perform that procedure and force them to just sit and watch the women suffer if that happens to go against their conscious!!!

either the hospitals have the right to decide what policies will be adhered to within their walls, according their freedom of religion, right to preserve their conscious and can therefore require their providers to provide whatever legal medical care that is necessary, especially in emergency cases, or the medical staff have the right to follow their own conscious and provide the care that they deem as appropriate. it shouldn't be going both ways, always favoring the prolife position.
yes, there are two lives at stake, but ya know just how stupid it is to risk the life on one of those lives, when knowing full well the other is doomed, because of "conscious"???



edit on 21-1-2018 by dawnstar because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2018 @ 05:02 PM
link   
No one seemed to give 2 before Obama changed the 'rules'. So why now that Trumps changed it back to the way it was, is it suddenly an Issue filled with Liberal angst?
edit on 21-1-2018 by BotheLumberJack because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2018 @ 01:54 AM
link   
a reply to: richapau
Sorry your mind has already been captured by the Globalists and Satan. Trumps followers are a Trumpet for Freedom in America and the world. Your captured mind is owned by the evil forces on this planet and cannot discern that Freedom is free thinking. You feel that control of your mind is preferable to free thought. Sad.



edit on 22-1-2018 by thepixelpusher because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2018 @ 08:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: Painterz
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.


you are a bit right, and that is the entire problem that this law has caused. lets fix your statement.

currently, non-religious people are free to impose their personal beliefs upon other people who might not share their beliefs.

well that's not freedom is it? that's allowing one group of people to impose their beliefs onto everyone else.

just a couple minor changes and it shows how true it is applied to having this law in place.



posted on Jan, 22 2018 @ 09:09 AM
link   
a reply to: generik

ThirdEyeofHorus gave a few examples of the cases where medical providers were "forced"....
in one of them from the articles about it that she provided we can ascertain two things...
1. the doctor claimed the women could die.
2. the hospital determined that it was a cat 2 emergency... meaning intervention would have to be done with 6 hours.
so we have a doctor and hospital agreeing the abortion was necessary to protect the women's life while the nurse is deciding that her religious beliefs was far too important to safe the life of another. kind of like refusing to help pull a cow out of a fast moving river on the sabbath, or in Jesus' case I believe it was a sheep out of the mud or something akin to that.
okay, let's agree that the nurse should be able to preserve her beliefs in even the most extreme conditions. Maybe we then should also extend this some, in order to protect the patients of the hospital to barring such nurses and medical providers from working in the maternity ward or er room also, just to avoid the situation from occurring to begin with?

now if this same case occurred in a catholic hospital it is quite possible that the hospital would have barred the doctor from intervening even though the doctor believed that the patient could die and the hospital had determined that something would have to be done within a six hour time frame. this would force the doctor into making a choice between two difficult options, waiting around in hopes that the baby's heartbeat would stop before the mother dies, or transferring her to the closest hospital that would allow him to provide the medical care he believed she needed... which considering in some areas of the country, that closest hospital could be 150 miles away and the travel time might eat up most of that 6 hours window. and then he might be hoping and praying that the her records would be sent with her, because for some reason there have been cases where the hospital neglected to do even that!!!
in both these cases, you have employers at odds with the actual providers of the care when it comes to beliefs and conscious, and there have been quite a few lawsuits against catholic hospitals about their care in these situation...
the courts have yet to side against the hospital, the belief and conscious of the actual providers have never been protected in these cases.

as more and more small independent hospitals ran into financial trouble the past few decades, the catholic conglomerates have taken advantage and backed by the wealth of the catholic church, they have scooped them up, expanded their reign to the point where 1 in 6 hospital beds are within the catholic system. more and more women have no choice but to obtain their care from them... more and more doctors and nurses have found that they have to do business with them. why don't their conscious matter?



posted on Jan, 22 2018 @ 10:16 AM
link   


The young woman had arrived at Wheaton Franciscan-St. Joseph hospital in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, in labor. She was 18 weeks pregnant, and her twin fetuses were long from viable. She miscarried one fetus within hours of admission, but her labor stalled while the second still had a heartbeat. Because the hospital followed rules issued by the Catholic Church, until the patient hemorrhaged or showed at least two signs of infection—fever of 100.4 or higher, uterine tenderness, rapid heart rate, or rapid fetal heart rate—Ralph could do little except watch her sicken.

So Ralph’s team trimmed the umbilical cord from the miscarried twin as short as possible to minimize the infection risk, and waited overnight.

After about 10 hours, the patient’s temperature soared to 102 or 103 degrees, Ralph recalled in an interview with Rewire in June, a few months after the incident. Ralph and her team gave the patient medication to induce labor. But Ralph could not administer mifepristone, which the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) considers part of the most effective drug regimen for such cases. The Catholic hospital didn’t carry the drug, which is commonly used for medication abortions—a failure Ralph believes was religiously motivated and needlessly prolonged her patient’s labor.

At first, the patient’s goals seemed to align with the hospital’s rules, Ralph said: She wanted to try to continue her pregnancy to a viable gestation, even though the chances were slim. But as she rapidly sickened, she and her family pleaded with Ralph to speed up the process of ending her pregnancy. Ralph felt powerless. The fastest, safest method for terminating a second-trimester pregnancy—a surgical procedure called dilation and evacuation (D and E)—was not offered at St. Joseph, where no supervising physicians were capable of performing the common abortion procedure, Ralph said.

For more than 24 hours, the patient labored through painful contractions. She bled heavily, requiring at least one blood transfusion. Her lips and face lost their color. Finally, she delivered a fetus that had no hope of survival.

If the patient had gone to Froedtert Hospital, about five miles away, she would likely have been offered the option of a surgical abortion or induction, without having to get sick first. If she had chosen induction, she could have received mifepristone.

rewire.news...



posted on Jan, 22 2018 @ 11:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: BotheLumberJack
No one seemed to give 2 before Obama changed the 'rules'. So why now that Trumps changed it back to the way it was, is it suddenly an Issue filled with Liberal angst?


That's what I've been saying throughout the thread. As this article accurately states, the Trump Administration is merely undoing the "damage" that the Obama Administration inflicted upon the medical community.

Excerpted from: www.nationalreview.com...

The reality is that the Trump HHS has issued a notice of a proposed rule (essentially, a draft regulation for public review and comment), that will empower the agency to robustly enforce multiple statutes passed by Congress and signed by presidents from both parties — statutes that the Obama administration had unlawfully and unilaterally revised or undermined.

In other words, the Trump administration intends to enforce the law as written, creating a Conscience and Religious Freedom Division within the civil-rights office of HHS. The only scandal here is the enduring (mainly progressive) idea that the executive branch can or should possess the authority to ignore or change laws passed by Congress. The religion of the Trump officials is irrelevant. Only their actions matter.



posted on Jan, 23 2018 @ 03:04 AM
link   
This from ppl who lose their dudu, when Muslim workers don't or refused to pack pork products at a supermarket, or have Ham or beer in their cabs...hypocritical much??!...do ur f.king job or find life elsewhere, how about that.



posted on Jan, 23 2018 @ 05:39 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust


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. 


No !! it's because Trump is a man baby who is scrapping everything that have Obama's name on it.



new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join