Daniel2 Posted January 31, 2015 Posted January 31, 2015 Elder Oaks said it best defending a Doctor who due to his religious belief he should not have to perform an abortion. He said," There are plenty of doctors who will willingly do this service so this doctor should not have to comply. I am sure that the Gay Couple who wanted the Christian Baker to decorate their cake could have found someone else who supported their marriage to design it for them. The same-sex couples who wanted the ordained ministers in Idaho to perform their wedding could have had it done by the local justice of the peace. When the LGBT community got the court to declare their marriages valid they did not want to stop there. They now want to force their views on those who have a Constitutional right to have opposing views.Are there any examples of doctors being compelled to perform abortions against their will...?Anyone have any references?
Duncan Posted January 31, 2015 Posted January 31, 2015 (edited) I don't think this has been finalized but it's something here in Canada at least http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health-and-fitness/health/ontario-doctors-who-deny-abortion-birth-control-must-refer-patients/article22035376/ I think it's a middle ground and that's good at least, the patient gets what they want and the Doctor isn't being forced to do anything they don't feel comfortable doing Edited January 31, 2015 by Duncan
Calm Posted January 31, 2015 Posted January 31, 2015 (edited) I don't know if they went through with it, but the California Medical Association sent out a letter to (and I assume he wasn't the only doctor in the state to get one) a relative who was an obgyn stating he might lose his license to practice there if he refuse to do a requested abortion or fertility treatments for homosexual couples. Maybe someone who lives in the state can confirm whether or not this became required. He moved from the state in part because of that. Edited January 31, 2015 by calmoriah
KevinG Posted January 31, 2015 Posted January 31, 2015 Taxpayers required to fund abortions, or pharmacists required to dispense abortifacients would probably be a better thread title.
Daniel2 Posted January 31, 2015 Author Posted January 31, 2015 (edited) I don't think this has been finalized but it's something here in Canada at leasthttp://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health-and-fitness/health/ontario-doctors-who-deny-abortion-birth-control-must-refer-patients/article22035376/I think it's a middle ground and that's good at least, the patient gets what they want and the Doctor isn't being forced to do anything they don't feel comfortable doingThanks for that link, Duncan. It's still doesn't appear that any doctor has been sued or forced to perform an actual abortion against their will in the U.S.. The article you posted mention two incidents of prescribing birth control in Canada- but doesn't mention anything about being forced to perform actual abortions. Edited January 31, 2015 by Daniel2
Daniel2 Posted January 31, 2015 Author Posted January 31, 2015 (edited) I don't know if they went through with it, but the California Medical Association sent out a letter to (and I assume he wasn't the only doctor in the state to get one) a relative who was an obgyn stating he might lose his license to practice there if he refuse to do a requested abortion or fertility treatments for homosexual couples. Maybe someone who lives in the state can confirm whether or not this became required. He moved from the state in part because of that.I appreciate the post, Calmoriah. I'm hoping for for something a little more concrete than hearsay. Not all OBGYN's are necessarily qualified or authorized to perform abortions routinely, so the details sound a little fishy to me.I'm looking for any specific examples of actual doctors who were authorised to and routinely performed abortions, but who declined to perform a given abortion because of religious objections, and were subsequently threatened with a lawsuit.Thus far, I haven't seen any actual evidence that this has ever happened, and the whole thing seems to be rhetorical scare tactics. I'm trying to find out if there's actual precedence for it. Edited January 31, 2015 by Daniel2
Calm Posted January 31, 2015 Posted January 31, 2015 (edited) I would be surprised given the political dynamite it is if abortion could end up being required any time soon. Politicians must walk on eggshells around the subject (unless theyve made it central to their platform) and surely any organization knows they will have to fork up tons in legal fees if they attempt to make it required given the history of challenges even if they believe in the end they would prevail.Fertility treatments otoh are on a different level, but not the subject of this thread (though I did wonder if perhaps abortion was included in the letter to help move fertility treatments to a more acceptable position....as in okay, we won't push on the abortion if you give on fertility treatments)I wouldn't be surprised to hear that someone used abortion to put pressure on doctors, either to become more conservative in their positions or less. The antiabortionists have at least in the past been very successful as I was just reading a paper from 96 iirc where it stated that the number of doctors agreeing to do abortions was so far down from what it was in the past, CA was having difficulty finding someone on staff to perform legally required abortions for prisoners and the legally incompetent (their word, not mine) at a local state hospital and the solution was eventually to contract it out to a private doctor. I don't know if the trend has reversed in the past 20 years or not.It has been a number of years since the letter was received and my memory is hardly that great. If I talk to him anytime soon I will try and remember to check the details with him."Not all OBGYN's are necessarily qualified or authorized to perform abortions routinely, so the details sound a little fishy to me."There was no claim either by him or myself that this was a letter sent out to all obgyns. Given that he had been a military doctor before going into private practice, I suspect his training would have been broad enough, but will try and remember to check on this as well. Edited January 31, 2015 by calmoriah
Rob Osborn Posted January 31, 2015 Posted January 31, 2015 .I appreciate the post, Calmoriah. I'm hoping for for something a little more concrete than hearsay. Not all OBGYN's are necessarily qualified or authorized to perform abortions routinely, so the details sound a little fishy to me.I'm looking for any specific examples of actual doctors who were authorised to and routinely performed abortions, but who declined to perform a given abortion because of religious objections, and were subsequently threatened with a lawsuit.Thus far, I haven't seen any actual evidence that this has ever happened, and the whole thing seems to be rhetorical scare tactics. I'm trying to find out if there's actual precedence for it.Most of the cases deal with the what is called as a medical abortion or "abortion pill" which different types can be taken up to 9 weeks after pregnancy to abort a fetus. The church pointed out the case of the pharmacist who based on his religious belief should have the right to not fill an abortion pill prescription. Several laws were put in place and remain in several states that protect a pharmacists right to deny filling a prescription to abort a fetus based on their religious and/or moral conscious convictions.
Bob Crockett Posted January 31, 2015 Posted January 31, 2015 (edited) Are there any examples of doctors being compelled to perform abortions against their will...?Anyone have any references?No. But, in California a fertility doctor cannot refuse to provide fertility services to gay couples . So, it isn't that a Christian doctor would be "forced" to perform such fertility services, it is that he or she would have to find some other speciality. (It isn't really that cut and dried; a doctor would be in such a predicament if he couldn't find somebody else in his partnership to do the deed.) But, presumably, the same doctor could not refuse to remove a wart from a gay person and expect to continue to be a skin doctor. But, the fertility issue is more core to a Christian doctor's values, as Evangelicals take seriously Paul's admonition that homosexuality is an abomination and John's admonition that the Christian should have no part of Babylon. So, then the patristic fathers wrote about the abomination of foeticide and homosexuality within decades of Paul's ministry, and that Christian should have no part of these things. I think it highly unlikely that an Evangelical doctor would be "forced" to perform an abortion if that is not his or her specialty. In other words, a dermatologist isn't going be be forced to perform an abortion. But, under California law, a doctor who has that speciality cannot refuse to perform an abortion upon a gay woman. Sort of impossible set of circumstances, it seems. The fight for Christian and religious liberty is a real one. Judge Walker, the gay judge who struck down Prop 8, cited as grounds to do the fact that Christian groups united to promote the Proposition, using words of hate. (Actually, so did the Muslims, but he didn't mention that.) He held the Proposition unconstitutional in part, or at least he implied it by citing extensively to the Christian effort, because religious groups were behind it. Thomas Jefferson himself wrote that religious groups shouldn't have a voice in the marketplace of political ideas. I find that astoundingly offensive, much more offensive than the offense taken by Mormons speaking out against gay marriage. And, with Jefferson's attitude, it is only a short step to attacking Christian universities and Evangelical universities who require students to pledge against gayness, and an even shorter step to require Evangelical professionals to be wedding planners and doctors to gays. Edited January 31, 2015 by Bob Crockett
Daniel2 Posted January 31, 2015 Author Posted January 31, 2015 (edited) My suspicion is that most doctors who object to abortion based on religious faith aren't in the business of performing abortions anyway.I'm not sure anyone can force their doctor to prescribe them any given prescription--I have requested preseptions from my doctor on occasion (IE trying a new sleeping pill or a new antibiotic at the advice of friends), but throughout my life, if my doctors didn't believe it was a good fit, they didn't prescribe it, or would refer me to a specialist. Is there a law on the books that says doctors MUST prescribe any given medications at the demand of any of their patients...?! This seems inaccurate, to me. Even "morning after" pills or any other birth control meds.The ACTUAL instances I'm aware of deal with pharmacists not wanting to fill prescriptions that are for birth control or morning after pills, or religious businesses not wanting to carry such meds on their health benefit plans (i.e. thr Hobby Lobby decision).And as I've said, I believe employers should be free to fire employees who object to fulfilling the responsibilities for the job for which they are hired.The doctor thing.... I still am not yet aware of any Doctors being forced to prescribe morning after pills or perform abortions against their will. Edited January 31, 2015 by Daniel2
Daniel2 Posted January 31, 2015 Author Posted January 31, 2015 (edited) No. But, in California a fertility doctor cannot refuse to provide fertility services to gay couples . So, it isn't that a Christian doctor would be "forced" to perform such fertility services, it is that he or she would have to find some other speciality. (It isn't really that cut and dried; a doctor would be in such a predicament if he couldn't find somebody else in his partnership to do the deed.) But, presumably, the same doctor could not refuse to remove a wart from a gay person and expect to continue to be a skin doctor. But, the fertility issue is more core to a Christian doctor's values, as Evangelicals take seriously Paul's admonition that homosexuality is an abomination and John's admonition that the Christian should have no part of Babylon.Fertility specialists are a different subject entirely, and not the point or in the scope of this thread.My concern here is that I believe that it's dishonest and mere fear-mongering to use the example of doctors being forced to perform abortions against their will when discussing religious liberty, because I don't believe that's a legitimate issue.Thus far, there still doesn't seem to be any evidence for it. Edited January 31, 2015 by Daniel2
Bob Crockett Posted January 31, 2015 Posted January 31, 2015 I don't think it is a different subject at all. It isn't that a doctor would be forced to perform a procedure against his or her will; it is that a doctor could not practice in his or her specialty if he or she refused to serve a gay person. How is that any different than the abortion issue, really? Hair splitting isn't a compelling argument.
Rob Osborn Posted January 31, 2015 Posted January 31, 2015 Fertility specialists are a different subject entirely, and not the point or in the scope of this thread.My concern here is that I believe that it's dishonest and mere fear-mongering to use the example of doctors being forced to perform abortions against their will when discussing religious liberty, because I don't believe that's a legitimate issue.Thus far, there still doesn't seem to be any evidence for it.No sure what you are referring to about Oaks said anything about being "forced" to perform abortions. Could you provide a link?
MormonFreeThinker Posted January 31, 2015 Posted January 31, 2015 (edited) Are there any examples of doctors being compelled to perform abortions against their will...?Anyone have any references? Doctors should be forced to perform abortions if the life or heath of the patient is in danger, if no other doctor in the country is available. Jehovah Witnesses doctors should be forced to give blood to the patients that need it. Edited January 31, 2015 by MormonFreeThinker
Calm Posted January 31, 2015 Posted January 31, 2015 (edited) I don't think it is a different subject at all. It isn't that a doctor would be forced to perform a procedure against his or her will; it is that a doctor could not practice in his or her specialty if he or she refused to serve a gay person. How is that any different than the abortion issue, really? Hair splitting isn't a compelling argument.In terms of law, yes. In terms of emotional appeal, ending a life (as it is seen by many) is significantly different than creating life.I suspect there are many more comfortable with requiring fertility treatments than abortions even if legally the issue being dealt with at that time ends up being the same.PS: I see that you are responding to Daniel's comment which was given in a different context than mine.... Edited January 31, 2015 by calmoriah
Recommended Posts