Saturday, July 19, 2008

Bush v. Contraception, round 1 1/2

The New York Times has an article up, where it describes the HHS's recent proposal to broaden the definition of Abortion as follows:

The Bush administration wants to require all recipients of aid under federal health programs to certify that they will not refuse to hire nurses and other providers who object to abortion and even certain types of birth control. Under the draft of a proposed rule, hospitals, clinics, researchers and medical schools would have to sign “written certifications” as a prerequisite to getting money under any program run by the Department of Health and Human Services.

The Huffington Post also comments, as follows:

This proposed rule will put women's access to birth control and the information they need to make health care decisions at risk. It radically redefines abortion to include some of the most common and effective methods of birth control. As a result, women's ability to manage their own health care is at risk of being compromised by politics and ideology. And it will limit the rights of patients to receive complete and accurate health information and services.

This is terribly harmful to humans (women, whom the rules directly impact, and men and children whom the rules also impact, just in a slightly more indirect fashion.) The rules also permit organizations (or people in said organizations) to not perform sterilizations. Truly scary stuff.

What to do? Write someone.


tamar said...

Such nerve for the right wing to be trying to impose their extreme views on the public in this manner! Although I am pro-choice I can understand why some people legitimately disagree and want to disallow abortions---the actual surgical procedures. But to over-reach and proclaim that UNIMPLANTED embryos are being aborted if they are kept from implanting is just too theologically driven to have any place in our legal system. ( By the way, I don't believe in "God-given rights" either.)

I understand they are not (yet) trying to make contraception illegal, but rather are attempting to protect the religious rights of professionals, both MD's and pharmacists who do not wish to be complicit in contraception.

This really opens up a can of worms. Do hospitals and clinics then have a right to ask about religious affiliation when hiring if they suspect that that affiliation will compromise the institutions ability to serve the community? Should anti birth-control doctors have to post a sign on their doors and in the yellow pages? I doubt that my insurance company would want to pay for TWO doctor visits in the event that the first one did not yield the desired prescription.

And what about the rights of an individual living in an otherwise homogeneous community? Should her access to legal contraception be blocked just because she lives in some remote town where the prevailing religion disapproves? Will we all need to live in communities of like-minded people? That hardly sounds like religious freedom.

If doctors have such strong religious feelings about contraception, they should choose a branch of medical practice that is not hindered by their personal attitudes. Would people put up with a Hindu butcher who stocked the entire meat case with 'Tofurky' (an extraordinarily foul meat substitute)? I think not. That Hindu would be stacking grits in the dry goods section faster than you could say prime rib!
Our medical professionals need to be able to confine their religious restrictions to their own lives.

djinn said...

This makes me see red (even orange.) As I stated in my original post, four fifths of fertilized embryos are all flushed flushed flushed killed by women's bodies. Even Good Abortion-hatin' Sign totin' many kiddo's havin' righteous sincere bitches. Get Some Scence Education People!!!!!!!

If my body is so profigate with fertilized embryos, doesn't that at least imply that "God" is not so worried about them as well?

tamar said...

Too bad the faithful will understand 'those' flushings as the will of God. Why can't they interpret the existence or educated doctors and efficacious medicines as the will of God as well? How many people turn down eyeglasses because God wanted their vision to be blurry?