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.

 

Oklahoma Rape Victim Denied Emergency Contraceptives. Doctor Cites Religious Objection As Reason

page: 2
12
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 31 2012 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by PeterWiggin
reply to post by grey580
 

But then treated as some subhuman trash on top of that.
That blows.

I must have missed that part - or do you personally always feel like subhuman trash when something you request is denied?



You sir have the compassion of dirt.

And no I don't feel that way.

And I see how you feel about raped women. You just don't.




posted on May, 31 2012 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by grey580
 
While that was impressively melodramatic - it was hardly correct.

I agree, rape is terrible. But I don't see where the hospital treated this lady like "subhuman trash".

Now, I will say that's a fitting description of the way most aborted fetuses are handled, but I can't apply it here - so simmer down there just a bit. I'm not trying to be cruel to this woman, I just don't see how you're pushing it quite to that level.



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 01:54 PM
link   
reply to post by PeterWiggin
 


Maybe I'm going a little overboard because I have 2 girls.

And I would want them treated compassionately as possible after a traumatic event.

I think that's where I'm coming from.

And from my point of view a doctor is there to help people.
If a doctor can't or won't help then they need to move aside and let someone else do the work.



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by grey580
 


A doctor has every right to refuse a treatment unless it is life-threatening. I'm sure the hospital had plenty of other doctors that could have administered it. In fact, the "morning after" pill does not even require a prescription in most cases, she could have just picked it up at the pharmacy on her way home without the doctors orders.

Why should the woman's rights be more important than the doctor's (also a woman) rights?



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 02:04 PM
link   
reply to post by PeterWiggin
 


Suppose no one helps this girl and she is basically forced to have this kid. Suppose she hates the notion that she is being forced to have her attacker's baby. Suppose she hates the child. Suppose there are obstacles to her putting the kid up for adoption and she is stuck with it. Suppose she abuses it. My ultimate point is that if the kid is unwanted (as can be ascertained by the girl asking for the contraceptive) then she may mistreat it if it's born. It's a lot of supposing, but it happens more than we would like to imagine. Who could argue with her request but a complete and total heartless individual devoid of empathy? Say the pregnancy continues somehow, and then, nature obliterates the pregnancy by spontaneous miscarriage around 11-13 weeks. Then, of course...it's alright. It's an act of 'god' or nature. However, the human the unwanted circumstance is happening to has no right in some folks book to take charge of her own well-being. Tsk, tsk.



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 02:07 PM
link   
reply to post by grey580
 
Now that, I can definitely understand and appreciate...I just try to remain dispassionate when comes to news and studies since I've seen way too many inflammatory issues cause WAY to much reactionary knee-jerking and disproportionate response.

I AM curious as to why people wouldn't just go to WalMart or some such and pick up some spermicide in these cases? It comes with a little syringe and everything, and I'd imagine they're probably easier to find than the hospitals - cheaper, too.

Anyhow, I meant no offense here, I can just see both sides of the issue and it looks like she got taken care of just fine, with plenty of breathing room.

Take care.



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 02:09 PM
link   
reply to post by HoppedUp
 


This isn't a question of whether or not she should be allowed to end the pregnancy; this is a question of whether or not we should force another person to help her against their will.

I'm not a big fan of abortions, but the morning after pill is acceptable to me, and cases of rape are one of the common exceptions where abortion should be an option.

Still, I would never make someone perform the abortion if they had moral reservations with it. How would you like to be forced to murder something you felt was a live baby? Could you do it? Would you do it?

The woman has every right to the medication, and the doctor has every right to refuse to participate and let someone else do it instead.



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by grey580
reply to post by popsmayhem
 


No idea.
I would think so also.
But the issue was that she should not have been turned away.
It's bad enough to be raped. But then treated as some subhuman trash on top of that.
That blows.

here's a news video clip.
www.news9.com...


How is one person refusing to contribute to their interpretation of murder treating anyone like subhuman trash?

What about the doctors oath to never intentioally harm anyone? This unborn baby is to this doctor a "someone".

In order for both parties rights to be adhered to the victim would need a doctor who defined life in the same manner as she did, therefore the request to prevent the life from generating is in line with the doctors professional oath.

This doctor has as much rights as this victim in terms of the "choice".
edit on 31-5-2012 by ElohimJD because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 02:15 PM
link   
reply to post by HoppedUp
 
Yes yes, suppose all these things that didn't happen might actually have happened and no other options or reconsiderations down the line were available despite the profusion of them that actually exist, especially when your family is supporting your decision and you live in a state with safe-haven laws..as all states currently do.

I know the world is sometimes not the most pleasant place, but on this matter there are always options on both sides of the decision. Short of your family keeping you under constant lock and key or threatening you with death, I'd like to know how many women are actually subjected legally to the scenario you describe? It seems to me that a woman always has legal options, regardless of her decision.



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
reply to post by grey580
 


Read the original story. The hospital says it's not equipped to handle rape cases.
They haven't got rape kits. They haven't got doctors or nurses trained in handling rape cases.

Your 'news' sources are left wing sites.
They seem to have overlooked that information.

If you want the truth ... we need to dig in and find out the name of the 'hospital' (if it was a hospital)
and find out why they don't have rape kits and medical staff trained for rape cases.

THAT is where a conspiracy story may be hiding in all this ...


Not "equipped" to handle rape cases? Seriously? Really?

CJ



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 02:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by HoppedUp
 


This isn't a question of whether or not she should be allowed to end the pregnancy; this is a question of whether or not we should force another person to help her against their will.



That's what it is boiling down to for that girl, the obstacle of ending an unwanted pregnancy when medical professionals are not assisting her. I hope she found another medical center or resource for help. Regardless of their personal opinion or "will", a doctor should help a patient with a valid complaint. "First do no harm" right? What if my dentist has a sister that is a recovering or current opiate addict and she feels strongly about prescribing opiate pain relief, even when it may be needed? Is that fair to me after getting 4 wisdom teeth removed that her personal convictions affect my health care now? What is it doing to this girl's mental state to endure all of this after an attack? Being denied a right? They should have given her DIRECTIONS to the nearest pharmacy that sold the contraceptive if they were that opposed to helping a rape victim. My goodness, this world is PC'd and dogma'd to bits. How far removed are we from each other that we can't put ourselves in another's shoes? I have a cardiovascular condition and should not become pregnant again. I wonder given my medical history, if these doctors would force me to endure a pregnancy, because by golly, to hell with the health of the tree, it's all about the fruit.
edit on 31-5-2012 by HoppedUp because: (no reason given)

edit on 31-5-2012 by HoppedUp because: error



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 02:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by HoppedUp
reply to post by PeterWiggin
 


Suppose no one helps this girl and she is basically forced to have this kid. Suppose she hates the notion that she is being forced to have her attacker's baby. Suppose she hates the child. Suppose there are obstacles to her putting the kid up for adoption and she is stuck with it. Suppose she abuses it. My ultimate point is that if the kid is unwanted (as can be ascertained by the girl asking for the contraceptive) then she may mistreat it if it's born. It's a lot of supposing, but it happens more than we would like to imagine. Who could argue with her request but a complete and total heartless individual devoid of empathy? Say the pregnancy continues somehow, and then, nature obliterates the pregnancy by spontaneous miscarriage around 11-13 weeks. Then, of course...it's alright. It's an act of 'god' or nature. However, the human the unwanted circumstance is happening to has no right in some folks book to take charge of her own well-being. Tsk, tsk.


If a human being harms another human being it is a choice of that human being.

This scenario makes the choices of one who harms others the responsibility of a third party whose rights are also protected.

She has every right in the world to take charge of her own well being with a multitude of day after drugs over the counter and a multitude of other doctors who do not define the origin of life the way this doctor does.



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 02:22 PM
link   
reply to post by HoppedUp
 



I have a cardiovascular condition and should not become pregnant again. I wonder given my medical history, if these doctors would force me to endure a pregnancy, because by golly, to hell with the health of the tree, it's all about the fruit.



If you became pregnant, knowing your condition, then it would be you who took the risk, not the doctor putting you in that risky situation. Personal responsibility.

The rape victim didn't have a choice, but.......

So, if I brought you a beautiful little puppy, and came up with some obscure reason why it was your duty to murder it, would you do it?

Doctors become doctors to treat illness, not deal with social issues.



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 02:22 PM
link   
reply to post by ElohimJD
 


Funny. I find it ironic that a doctor would have no issue making a determination to "pull the plug" but won't give a rape victim a morning after pill due to their "beliefs". Sounds like the makings of some serious issues within hospitals. There are many cases of doctors going way above and beyond what is "normal practice" and saving patients who's hearts have stopped. Who makes the choice as to when to stop trying to help someone? Can it be considered "killing" someone if you make a decision to stop? Where is this line drawn?

CJ



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 02:23 PM
link   
reply to post by ElohimJD
 


I do not agree with you. I can't even say I understand where you are coming from. I'd like to know what YOU would do, if you found yourself in her situation. Freshly attacked by a monster, and now, what? Holding on to some principle of protecting a would-be/could-be but not even yet viable life-form, that is of your very attacker. Sick principles, in my opinion.



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 02:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by HoppedUp

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by HoppedUp
 


This isn't a question of whether or not she should be allowed to end the pregnancy; this is a question of whether or not we should force another person to help her against their will.



That's what it is boiling down to for that girl, the obstacle of ending an unwanted pregnancy when medical professionals are not assisting her. I hope she found another medical center or resource for help. Regardless of their personal opinion or "will", a doctor should help a patient with a valid complaint. "First do no harm" right? What if my dentist has a sister that is a recovering or current opiate addict and she feels strongly about prescribing opiate pain relief, even when it may be needed? Is that fair to me after getting 4 wisdom teeth removed that her personal convictions affect my health care not? What is it doing to this girl's mental state to endure all of this after an attack? Being denied a right? They should have given her DIRECTIONS to the nearest pharmacy that sold the contraceptive if they were that opposed to helping a rape victim. My goodness, this world is PC'd and dogma'd to bits. How far removed are we from each other that we can't put ourselves in another's shoes? I have a cardiovascular condition and should not become pregnant again. I wonder given my medical history, if these doctors would force me to endure a pregnancy, because by golly, to hell with the health of the tree, it's all about the fruit.
edit on 31-5-2012 by HoppedUp because: (no reason given)


Another silly conclusion. In the event the mothers life is in danger physically then the rules change; this woman was in no physical danger as a result of the pregnacy, therefore it is NOT a tree vs. fruit scenario in any way. In the event that is was and this doctor still refused tto abort the baby to save the mother hen you would have a valid argument. The only life in danger for this doctor was the unborn child's (in her opinion) and her oath requires "no harm done".

But lets compare apples to apples and keep your hypotheticals within reason, it will help keep this thread on track.



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 02:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by ColoradoJens

Not "equipped" to handle rape cases? Seriously? Really?

CJ


Prove it was. Prove they had trained nurses,
on staff at the time that could do this..
Taking the mother and daughters
claim only as full truth, but ignoring the hospitals?

Seriously really?


edit on 31-5-2012 by popsmayhem because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 02:29 PM
link   
reply to post by popsmayhem
 


What exactly do you need to "equip" yourself to "handle" rape cases? Compassion and understanding? Clearly this hospital has neither so maybe they are not "equipped".

Edit to add: the only real issue is whether they "want" to give them the morning after pill if requested. Thank goodness for the ACLU:


In caring for rape patients, hospitals should be equipped with the information and tools to present women with this option to prevent pregnancy. This includes having procedures in place to provide uninterrupted care to the patient if her attending doctor refuses to provide EC. To respect both the religious freedom of the doctor and the right to access all available treatment options of the patient, hospitals can arrange to have another doctor on duty dispense the medication.


link

CJ
edit on 31-5-2012 by ColoradoJens because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 02:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by HoppedUp
 



I have a cardiovascular condition and should not become pregnant again. I wonder given my medical history, if these doctors would force me to endure a pregnancy, because by golly, to hell with the health of the tree, it's all about the fruit.



If you became pregnant, knowing your condition, then it would be you who took the risk, not the doctor putting you in that risky situation. Personal responsibility.

The rape victim didn't have a choice, but.......

So, if I brought you a beautiful little puppy, and came up with some obscure reason why it was your duty to murder it, would you do it?

Doctors become doctors to treat illness, not deal with social issues.



I've taken every measure aside from major surgery to remove my organs that I need to sustain normal hormone function as a female human. And no, I am not going there. It is my right to have the organs I was born with that maintain my health, and I won't be cut open just to make some group of self-righteous _____s say, "Ah, that's better. Now of course, it's not your fault if you get pregnant, you no longer have the equipment." That equipment also serves other functions. There is nothing obscure about being a victim of a crime and being forced to bear a child of an attacker, and I resent you comparing it to a being given puppy and being told to slaughter it. Man, seriously?



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 02:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by ColoradoJens
reply to post by ElohimJD
 


Funny. I find it ironic that a doctor would have no issue making a determination to "pull the plug" but won't give a rape victim a morning after pill due to their "beliefs". Sounds like the makings of some serious issues within hospitals. There are many cases of doctors going way above and beyond what is "normal practice" and saving patients who's hearts have stopped. Who makes the choice as to when to stop trying to help someone? Can it be considered "killing" someone if you make a decision to stop? Where is this line drawn?

CJ


In most cases the family of the patient are the ones who allow the pulling of the plug. To the doctors, a patient on life support pays the bills.

This is not about end of life practices, nor is the doctor here to answer these types of hypotheticals, since I am not her, I cannot tell you the line if their is one. Just that this doctor has the right to make this choice and whether it is right or wrong is subjective; whether it was leagal however is not, leagally the doctor did nothing wrong.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join