Sometimes I think that we older people think that we just need to get back to the USA that we knew and loved. I think the reality is that we could never get back to that-or even be able to find our way back. These monstrous fucking republicans have done their insidious work well.
Because Christian Nazionalists have been conditioned from a very early age that the claim counts as evidence. Even if he could provide the states and the statutes, he won't because "evidence" is a dirty word to people like him.
I think there is a case for not letting people who are sociopaths, hard-core religious fundamentalists, and people with Judgmental Personalities into medical schools. Being a physician is not a political or religious statement - it is a calling and the object is to care for the sick and injured. I understand this is not realistic, but someone who has the knowledge and experience to render critically-needed care and just walks away has no business having a medical license. Says an outraged old Doc.
I'm not sure I want religious tests or ideology tests as part of a medical school application. However I'd find it perfectly legit for State Medical Boards to consider an applicant's "I will not treat...because it's against my religion" statements when they decide to issue or reject licenses to operate in a state. Or when a complaint comes in after the fact.
I have never been sure how we deal with the problem of ‘inappropriate’ people in medicine. Too many of them are only there for the money, but there are more than a few there to stick it to people they dislike. I used to teach medicine and we talked among the faculty about this.
👆👆👆👆👆👆👆🎯If you lack empathy, or are using your religion to make other people suffer, you should never be admitted to medical school, totally agree! I always palmed those surgeons off on a narcissistic co-worker, Oh dr. x is coming "he likes you. he hates me." worked every time.
“West said this kind of bill was successful in other states, …”
Successful how?
Successful in passing? - not surprising, not desirable, but not the end of the world.
Successful in protecting religious freedom? - that’s a laugh. It only breeds white Christian nationalism.
Successful in stopping people from accessing care? - sucks big time, but also status quo. There’s plenty of healthcare deserts and folks unable to afford insurance and care. People are already dying from a lack of access, allowing doctors to deny care for religion is only a drop in the bucket in the good ole USA.
Successful in causing death in people these legislators hate? - there you go. The real purpose of the bill.
Unfortunately, the kind of people who would refuse treatment are not very nice people. The people who are nice people would never refuse treatment.. I’d call it a vicious circle, but they are just vicious
No. I've disagreed vehemently with physicians, PAs, nurses, and other health care professionals before (made for some interesting discussions!), but they were ever and always professional, no matter our differences. They seemed to be putting into practice that moving admonition from the Oath of Mainmonides, "May I never see in a patient anything but a fellow creature in pain."
And now some religious savage will cite this to justify denying woman pain management like epidurals because some ignorant goat herder said woman should suffer when they give birth. These animals go out of their way to spread death, disease, misery and suffering. At some point soon it will have to be ended.
I am seeing some posts of cases where certain procedures that when performed on men are regularly done with certain anesthetics but similar and more invasive procedures performed on women are never performed with an anesthetic. Placing catheters is one where when done for men routinely done with lidocaine but women only receive it when there’s issues with placement. Even ultrasounds on genitalia for men is provided a sedative (most likely to avoid a response by said body parts) but women are never given one for the vaginal ultrasounds, even when done outside of pregnancy. We’re not given anything more than Tylenol or Motrin for invasive pelvic exams, cancer screenings where’d they enter the uterus and punch holes in the cervix for biopsies. There are still hospitals that withhold epidurals for religious reasons.
I have experienced some of this unaware that a similar procedure for men would have anesthesia but understanding that the procedure is typically not anesthetized for women.
So really, this is the way of things already. But this law would interfere in any change we might affect. Anyway, I’m not arguing with you, just lamenting the situation altogether.
I was aware of the "women have higher pain tolerance" claim. Not sure if that's a invidious myth intended to justify not giving women painkillers, trope but with no malign intent, or has some real basis in evidence. But even if it's the latter, that shouldn't matter in terms of *choice*. An individual patient is not the same as the statistical average. So give everyone the choice, advise everyone the same about the expected pain level and let the folks with higher pain tolerance (of both sexes) opt not to take it, if that is their choice.
There is also a medical myth that Black people have higher pain tolerance, that is still sometimes taught in medical schools (probably in the south) It is not true, and I suspect it was used to justify hurting them, by racist doctors.
"The myth that Black people have a higher pain tolerance than white people may be due to a significant number of medical professionals believing that Black people have thicker skin than white people. A 2016 study highlights that Black Americans receive pain treatment less frequently than white Americans."
Carrying that attitude to its "logical" conclusion would result in the elimination of the entire healthcare and pharmaceutical industries, all on the basis that God's Will™ must NEVER be thwarted. Any disease, disorder, accident, or crime resulting in injury was a part of Yahweh's master plan and as such, should be accepted without complaint.
A more foolish or stupid concept I haven't heard in a while.
This is why the lord's prayer includes the phrase, "THY will be done." That's basically an open invitation to let Yahweh loose on yer ass without restraint. I learned that from Robert Heinlein and Job: A Comedy of Justice.
Class is another dimension to this whole Oklahoma law thing. The hospital, the courts, and society at large is much more likely to be tolerant of refusal of care when the victim is poor and powerless vs. when the victim is wealthy and powerful. Consider how a typical hospital CEO might respond differently to one of it's doctors refusing reproductive care on a random emergency call vs. Melinda Gates. Of course the Pope gets treated with the best of modern medicine; he's a Melinda Gates type patient. No institution is going to refuse. Even if one of their doctors refused, they'd expend massive resources to ensure such a person gets seamless, uninterrupted treatment from it's other staff doctors. But for the rest of us schmucks? The CEO wouldn't even want the staff to bother him with the nontreatment issue.
Just like Mother Theresa. I've been asked if I was named for her. No way!
She loved it when her patients suffered, but when she had medical problems, she got first class + treatment. No. Just no.
If anyone cares, I was named for my Aunt, who was basically killed in a car wreck when she was in her mid-teens. She held on for awhile in a coma, then finally passed.
Mom's told me about all the "Christian love" they received - what sins did you commit? You're not praying or believing hard enough - all such nonsense.
People think that Paul McCartney was referring to Jesus' mom in "Let It Be." He wasn't. His mother (who died when Paul was 14) was named Mary Patricia Mohin McCartney.
My mother was an accounts manager for Scotty's*, and she said that lawyers were the absolute worst at paying their bills on time. They even laughed about late penalties.
If doctors aren’t willing to provide care to everyone they shouldn’t be in the medical field at all. Nurses and any other provider included. These individuals ought to be weeded out during the education process. Teachers and advisors should be able to identify folks with this type of mentality. There should be concentration on finding these biases, surveys and interviews happen throughout, they can include some kind of screening. Sure it can let some folks through, but it will catch some of the worst of the worst.
If we’re worried about a lack of folks becoming medical professionals (nursing shortages) but it’s better to overwork good people than have someone who is actively trying to hurt people. Then we can address why there aren’t enough medical professionals, the nursing shortage has many causes but one big one os that they don’t pay the RNs who teach nursing in schools well enough, there’s plenty of people trying to get into the field but not enough folks willing to teach it for no pay. Then we allow institutions to mistreat them, and patients and staff. They are intentionally understaffed contributing to burnout. The solution is universal healthcare.
I’m getting a bit off topic, universal healthcare will solve this problem though. And we can set rules to protect patients from bigoted asshole providers.
Universal healthcare is also likely to be much cheaper.
But of course it has some negative consequences for insurance companies and their profits. And as those companies are likely to donate to politicians' campaigns, a universal public healthcare plan is as dead as the dodo ....
(I should rephrase this, as the dodo is alive ...... :-) )
I know I've mentioned this before, but here in northeast Ohio, we have an embarrassment of riches as it comes to hospital care, between Cleveland Clinic and University Hospitals and the multiple satellite facilities scattered throughout multiple counties. We have the further benefit of NEITHER of those hospitals being associated with ANY religion. Add MetroHealth to that and we're positively DROWNING in quality health care.
And yet there are places elsewhere in the United States that get characterized as "health care deserts." Worse, you have people like West who want to constrain their state's health care practices that much further. A great deal of this disparity might be resolved if health care and EASY access to such care were deemed a RIGHT.
But in a time when rights are being curtailed if not vitiated outright, I would not hold my breath for such a ruling.
The religious hospital I was born in. Lutheran Hospital, is now part of Cleveland Clinic. My aunt was the night time nursing supervisor there for years. She would have been the first to tell you that Lutheran Hospital had nothing to do with the Lutheran church. We have two large hospital systems in my current city. One is Catholic, and the other Southern Baptist.
our closest level one trauma Center is in Memphis-the Elvis Presley Trauma Center!
Your mentioning of catholic hospitals made me remember Lawrence O'Donnell's monologue from a few months ago. (He mentioned that he is from Boston and with a name like his, he's catholic or was at least raised catholic.) It was on occasion of that first lady being named, who died because she couldn't get a D&C. He told the story, that when he was young, no-one would have argued against providing D&Cs to the women who needed them. (Including his mother at one point.) He made the point that no catholic priest would have argued against a D&C. And here, a lady died because she needed a D&C and didn't get one. Lawrence was close to tears.
After the same thing happened in Ireland a few years ago, they changed the laws/constitution to allow abortions. Still lots of restrictions but no-one would die like Savita Halappanavar did. At least not in Ireland. It happened in Poland, though, during the last government. Here it was a lady called Izabela, leaving behind a husband and a daughter. She knew what was happening to her (she sent texts to her mother) but there was nowhere where she could go.
Pro-Forced-Birth only. Once they make them have the kid, they are on their own, and have the right to starve, because the FBers sure aren't paying anything.
Wow. I remember that segment and how ANGRY (yet composed) O'Donnell was. Hell, I commented on that one!
And the thing is, we should all be angry about it, about what has happened to women's rights, because of Dubya and Trump and the Supremes and all the bullshit they have layered on this country.
Good news regarding the hospital you cite. Would that more such facilities recognize that their religious dogma has no place in a treatment room or operating theater.
In an ideal world, a rational world, any 'doctor' who refused to treat a patient for any reason would have his or her license revoked. For good. For the good of patients, for the good of medical practice, for the good of having a state where people wouldn't live in fear of being denied life-saving care if some zealot crack pot said no.
Every state should pass legislation, including state constitutional amendments, that require all doctors to provide whatever care is necessary for their patients, regardless of their personal feelings. What's being proposed here is a religious test for medical care. And it's immoral.
Why would someone work at a job where their employment responsibilities involve possibility violating their "ethical, moral, or religious beliefs" in the first place?
Auschwitz is still with us. The Selection Ramp vs mass DNR notices issued without consent for specific demographics, and triage policies and end of life protocols. All linked to capitalism, the ruling class and killing the 'unproductive' in broad daylight
Because they are told to by their preachers, to get these type cases passed. They have found people to sue for every birth control advance made. There's always some gawd-botherer that will sue if told to, and they are gullible enough to claim harm, if told to.
And when that someone else is a doctor in Albuquerque, 400 miles away, and the paitent is a poor indigenous woman whose only transportation option is public transit? If the Nazis in OK ever pass something like this, the blood of many innocent poor people will be on their hands.
If that patient is in an emergency situation, getting help somewhere else from someone else is not an option. Never let these christian nationalists tell you they're 'pro-life.' It's a lie.
Yes exactly. How is an unconscious and bleeding person supposed to tell the EMT they want to go to a different hospital?
Beyond that, who pays for the second trip? The patient, I assume. Which means conservatives are putting all the costs for some doctor's decision not to treat on the victim of their bigotry.
Make the untreating doctor pay all "find a replacement" costs, then let's see how whether these fundies think it's a good idea.
Telling the EMT they want to go to a differnt hospital may not even work. My late wife was once in a car accident. She was conscious and vocal in her opposition to a particular area hospital. They took her there anyway, because it was the only one with a trauma center. And it wasn't even a conscience matter, that particular hospital had treated her very poorly years earlier, and she had zero trust that they would take proper care of her.
So, the difficulty of going to a different hospital that will treat the patient is compounded by the lack of medical resources in rural areas.
Catch-22. "We have a rule that says you can ask for a different hospital if the doctors at one refuses to treat you. We have another rule that says you don't get to pick your hospital."
It also possible that a patient wouldn't know to object en route because it might be that only after they've arrived at a certain hospital they learn some crack pot doctor won't treat them because of their personal 'feels.'
Elected officials should have NO SAY in medicine! NONE! They aren’t qualified! And if doctors wanna pick a choose, get the fuck out of medicine! Like the military, you take an oath to serve ALL!!!
We're hurtling towards two variations of fascism right now, which makes this quote extra relevant:
'When stupidity is considered patriotism, it is unsafe to be intelligent.'
~ Isaac Asimov
OOH, can I steal that??!
It's in the public domain.
The answer should have been "Of course 𝑵𝑶𝑻. It's in the public domain." Can't really steal that which is already yours.
You're welcome. 😉
The cousin of "You Can't Fix Stupid."
"hurtling towards" - Too late, we are already there.
Sometimes I think that we older people think that we just need to get back to the USA that we knew and loved. I think the reality is that we could never get back to that-or even be able to find our way back. These monstrous fucking republicans have done their insidious work well.
Well, not this old fart. You can never go back, only forward.
If your “principles” prohibit you from providing patients with care, maybe you’re in the wrong profession.
There is no “maybe” about it.
🎯
They're training to become republican politicians.
𝑊𝑒𝑠𝑡 𝑠𝑎𝑖𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑠 𝑘𝑖𝑛𝑑 𝑜𝑓 𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑙 𝑤𝑎𝑠 𝑠𝑢𝑐𝑐𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑓𝑢𝑙 𝑖𝑛 𝑜𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑠, 𝑏𝑢𝑡 ℎ𝑒 𝑑𝑖𝑑𝑛’𝑡 𝑜𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟 𝑎𝑛𝑦 𝑒𝑣𝑖𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑡𝑜 𝑏𝑎𝑐𝑘 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑢𝑝.
Because Christian Nazionalists have been conditioned from a very early age that the claim counts as evidence. Even if he could provide the states and the statutes, he won't because "evidence" is a dirty word to people like him.
I think there is a case for not letting people who are sociopaths, hard-core religious fundamentalists, and people with Judgmental Personalities into medical schools. Being a physician is not a political or religious statement - it is a calling and the object is to care for the sick and injured. I understand this is not realistic, but someone who has the knowledge and experience to render critically-needed care and just walks away has no business having a medical license. Says an outraged old Doc.
I'm not sure I want religious tests or ideology tests as part of a medical school application. However I'd find it perfectly legit for State Medical Boards to consider an applicant's "I will not treat...because it's against my religion" statements when they decide to issue or reject licenses to operate in a state. Or when a complaint comes in after the fact.
I have never been sure how we deal with the problem of ‘inappropriate’ people in medicine. Too many of them are only there for the money, but there are more than a few there to stick it to people they dislike. I used to teach medicine and we talked among the faculty about this.
👆👆👆👆👆👆👆🎯If you lack empathy, or are using your religion to make other people suffer, you should never be admitted to medical school, totally agree! I always palmed those surgeons off on a narcissistic co-worker, Oh dr. x is coming "he likes you. he hates me." worked every time.
Great EFN, great.
𝐖𝐡𝐢𝐜𝐡 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐟𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐇𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐌𝐨𝐬𝐭 𝐏𝐬𝐲𝐜𝐡𝐨𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐬? 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐅𝐞𝐰𝐞𝐬𝐭?
Check out #5 on the most list.
https://time.com/32647/which-professions-have-the-most-psychopaths-the-fewest/
“West said this kind of bill was successful in other states, …”
Successful how?
Successful in passing? - not surprising, not desirable, but not the end of the world.
Successful in protecting religious freedom? - that’s a laugh. It only breeds white Christian nationalism.
Successful in stopping people from accessing care? - sucks big time, but also status quo. There’s plenty of healthcare deserts and folks unable to afford insurance and care. People are already dying from a lack of access, allowing doctors to deny care for religion is only a drop in the bucket in the good ole USA.
Successful in causing death in people these legislators hate? - there you go. The real purpose of the bill.
More like successful in HURTING PEOPLE. But once again, the cruelty is the point.
They see the cruelty as a sign of power.
Yes, probably because they were abused by someone more powerful.
𝐾𝑒𝑣𝑖𝑛 𝑊𝑒𝑠𝑡, 𝑏𝑦 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑤𝑎𝑦, ℎ𝑎𝑠 𝑎 ℎ𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑦 𝑜𝑓 𝑒𝑥𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑚𝑖𝑠𝑚. 𝐴 𝑓𝑒𝑤 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠 𝑎𝑔𝑜, ℎ𝑒 𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑛 𝑎𝑔𝑟𝑒𝑒𝑑 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑎 𝑓𝑒𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑤 𝑒𝑥𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑚𝑖𝑠𝑡 𝑙𝑎𝑤𝑚𝑎𝑘𝑒𝑟 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝐵𝑙𝑎𝑐𝑘 𝐿𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑠 𝑀𝑎𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑠 𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑗𝑢𝑠𝑡 𝑙𝑖𝑘𝑒 𝑚𝑒𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝐾𝐾𝐾.
So he's a racist piece of shit too. Quelle surprise.
Racism may be the point, as this would allow doctors to decide it's against their religion to treat people of different colors or ethnicities.
Presumably this would allow those health professionals with religious objections to Republican bigots to refuse to treat them too.
Unfortunately, the kind of people who would refuse treatment are not very nice people. The people who are nice people would never refuse treatment.. I’d call it a vicious circle, but they are just vicious
No. I've disagreed vehemently with physicians, PAs, nurses, and other health care professionals before (made for some interesting discussions!), but they were ever and always professional, no matter our differences. They seemed to be putting into practice that moving admonition from the Oath of Mainmonides, "May I never see in a patient anything but a fellow creature in pain."
Good to hear but I think you missed that my tongue was firmly in my cheek.
I sspected so. Which is why I quoted Moshe ibn Maymun. His Guide for the Perplexed is multi-layered that way.
And now some religious savage will cite this to justify denying woman pain management like epidurals because some ignorant goat herder said woman should suffer when they give birth. These animals go out of their way to spread death, disease, misery and suffering. At some point soon it will have to be ended.
I am seeing some posts of cases where certain procedures that when performed on men are regularly done with certain anesthetics but similar and more invasive procedures performed on women are never performed with an anesthetic. Placing catheters is one where when done for men routinely done with lidocaine but women only receive it when there’s issues with placement. Even ultrasounds on genitalia for men is provided a sedative (most likely to avoid a response by said body parts) but women are never given one for the vaginal ultrasounds, even when done outside of pregnancy. We’re not given anything more than Tylenol or Motrin for invasive pelvic exams, cancer screenings where’d they enter the uterus and punch holes in the cervix for biopsies. There are still hospitals that withhold epidurals for religious reasons.
I have experienced some of this unaware that a similar procedure for men would have anesthesia but understanding that the procedure is typically not anesthetized for women.
So really, this is the way of things already. But this law would interfere in any change we might affect. Anyway, I’m not arguing with you, just lamenting the situation altogether.
I was not aware of that.
I was aware of the "women have higher pain tolerance" claim. Not sure if that's a invidious myth intended to justify not giving women painkillers, trope but with no malign intent, or has some real basis in evidence. But even if it's the latter, that shouldn't matter in terms of *choice*. An individual patient is not the same as the statistical average. So give everyone the choice, advise everyone the same about the expected pain level and let the folks with higher pain tolerance (of both sexes) opt not to take it, if that is their choice.
DM had a very high pain tolerance, mine is very low.
There is also a medical myth that Black people have higher pain tolerance, that is still sometimes taught in medical schools (probably in the south) It is not true, and I suspect it was used to justify hurting them, by racist doctors.
"The myth that Black people have a higher pain tolerance than white people may be due to a significant number of medical professionals believing that Black people have thicker skin than white people. A 2016 study highlights that Black Americans receive pain treatment less frequently than white Americans."
Nov 15, 2023
https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/medical-myths-that-hurt-black-people#:~:text=The%20myth%20that%20Black%20people,less%20frequently%20than%20white%20Americans.
I don't recall anything being given to me for my testicular ultrasounds, just that the damn gel was hard to wipe off and got all over my underwear.
Silicon-based would be my guess.
Carrying that attitude to its "logical" conclusion would result in the elimination of the entire healthcare and pharmaceutical industries, all on the basis that God's Will™ must NEVER be thwarted. Any disease, disorder, accident, or crime resulting in injury was a part of Yahweh's master plan and as such, should be accepted without complaint.
A more foolish or stupid concept I haven't heard in a while.
Well, in that case, shouldn't intercessory prayers be considered heresy? Where are the legislative bills forbidding those?
This is why the lord's prayer includes the phrase, "THY will be done." That's basically an open invitation to let Yahweh loose on yer ass without restraint. I learned that from Robert Heinlein and Job: A Comedy of Justice.
Thanks, Bob!
The Pope certainly has an issue with just letting disease take its course. He keeps turning to science, technology and modern medicine, the heretic!
If he survives, then it’s a miracle - praise god. If he dies, then God’s called him home - praise god.
Class is another dimension to this whole Oklahoma law thing. The hospital, the courts, and society at large is much more likely to be tolerant of refusal of care when the victim is poor and powerless vs. when the victim is wealthy and powerful. Consider how a typical hospital CEO might respond differently to one of it's doctors refusing reproductive care on a random emergency call vs. Melinda Gates. Of course the Pope gets treated with the best of modern medicine; he's a Melinda Gates type patient. No institution is going to refuse. Even if one of their doctors refused, they'd expend massive resources to ensure such a person gets seamless, uninterrupted treatment from it's other staff doctors. But for the rest of us schmucks? The CEO wouldn't even want the staff to bother him with the nontreatment issue.
Just like Mother Theresa. I've been asked if I was named for her. No way!
She loved it when her patients suffered, but when she had medical problems, she got first class + treatment. No. Just no.
If anyone cares, I was named for my Aunt, who was basically killed in a car wreck when she was in her mid-teens. She held on for awhile in a coma, then finally passed.
Mom's told me about all the "Christian love" they received - what sins did you commit? You're not praying or believing hard enough - all such nonsense.
😡😡🤬🤬
People think that Paul McCartney was referring to Jesus' mom in "Let It Be." He wasn't. His mother (who died when Paul was 14) was named Mary Patricia Mohin McCartney.
Cool factoid. Was not aware. Thanks.
I nearly named Aria "Yoko". You can guess why I ditched this idea. The number of times I was asked "From ArYa Stark in GoT?" was enough of a PITA.
Lawyers get white glove treatment, too, many times we were advised the patient was a lawyer, be extra-careful.
My mother was an accounts manager for Scotty's*, and she said that lawyers were the absolute worst at paying their bills on time. They even laughed about late penalties.
* Yeah, I know I am dating myself
If they still burned heretics, somebody would be SOL
He is hell-bound for heresy and blasphemy, IF gordamitee wated us to have medicine it would hav e given us pharmacies already buily.
To be fair, the Catholics have never been quite as antiscience as fundamentalists and evangelicals.
Tell it to Galileo.
He got house arrest. Fundamentalists would probably stone him to death. :)
Or Giordano Bruno
If doctors aren’t willing to provide care to everyone they shouldn’t be in the medical field at all. Nurses and any other provider included. These individuals ought to be weeded out during the education process. Teachers and advisors should be able to identify folks with this type of mentality. There should be concentration on finding these biases, surveys and interviews happen throughout, they can include some kind of screening. Sure it can let some folks through, but it will catch some of the worst of the worst.
If we’re worried about a lack of folks becoming medical professionals (nursing shortages) but it’s better to overwork good people than have someone who is actively trying to hurt people. Then we can address why there aren’t enough medical professionals, the nursing shortage has many causes but one big one os that they don’t pay the RNs who teach nursing in schools well enough, there’s plenty of people trying to get into the field but not enough folks willing to teach it for no pay. Then we allow institutions to mistreat them, and patients and staff. They are intentionally understaffed contributing to burnout. The solution is universal healthcare.
I’m getting a bit off topic, universal healthcare will solve this problem though. And we can set rules to protect patients from bigoted asshole providers.
Universal healthcare is also likely to be much cheaper.
But of course it has some negative consequences for insurance companies and their profits. And as those companies are likely to donate to politicians' campaigns, a universal public healthcare plan is as dead as the dodo ....
(I should rephrase this, as the dodo is alive ...... :-) )
So, if I lost my mind one day and decided to practice in OK, hypothetically I could refuse to treat all Republicans under this bill, right?
You are only supposed to be beastly to 'other' people!
Sauce for the GOP goose.
I know I've mentioned this before, but here in northeast Ohio, we have an embarrassment of riches as it comes to hospital care, between Cleveland Clinic and University Hospitals and the multiple satellite facilities scattered throughout multiple counties. We have the further benefit of NEITHER of those hospitals being associated with ANY religion. Add MetroHealth to that and we're positively DROWNING in quality health care.
And yet there are places elsewhere in the United States that get characterized as "health care deserts." Worse, you have people like West who want to constrain their state's health care practices that much further. A great deal of this disparity might be resolved if health care and EASY access to such care were deemed a RIGHT.
But in a time when rights are being curtailed if not vitiated outright, I would not hold my breath for such a ruling.
One of the few good things about red gerrymandered Ohio.
The religious hospital I was born in. Lutheran Hospital, is now part of Cleveland Clinic. My aunt was the night time nursing supervisor there for years. She would have been the first to tell you that Lutheran Hospital had nothing to do with the Lutheran church. We have two large hospital systems in my current city. One is Catholic, and the other Southern Baptist.
our closest level one trauma Center is in Memphis-the Elvis Presley Trauma Center!
Your mentioning of catholic hospitals made me remember Lawrence O'Donnell's monologue from a few months ago. (He mentioned that he is from Boston and with a name like his, he's catholic or was at least raised catholic.) It was on occasion of that first lady being named, who died because she couldn't get a D&C. He told the story, that when he was young, no-one would have argued against providing D&Cs to the women who needed them. (Including his mother at one point.) He made the point that no catholic priest would have argued against a D&C. And here, a lady died because she needed a D&C and didn't get one. Lawrence was close to tears.
After the same thing happened in Ireland a few years ago, they changed the laws/constitution to allow abortions. Still lots of restrictions but no-one would die like Savita Halappanavar did. At least not in Ireland. It happened in Poland, though, during the last government. Here it was a lady called Izabela, leaving behind a husband and a daughter. She knew what was happening to her (she sent texts to her mother) but there was nowhere where she could go.
Pro-life. Yes, pro-life. My ar*e!
Pro-Forced-Birth only. Once they make them have the kid, they are on their own, and have the right to starve, because the FBers sure aren't paying anything.
Here's the link for those who haven't seen it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMaHAI5tGUI
Wow. I remember that segment and how ANGRY (yet composed) O'Donnell was. Hell, I commented on that one!
And the thing is, we should all be angry about it, about what has happened to women's rights, because of Dubya and Trump and the Supremes and all the bullshit they have layered on this country.
Good news regarding the hospital you cite. Would that more such facilities recognize that their religious dogma has no place in a treatment room or operating theater.
And just what symptoms are you experiencing?
https://genius.com/Elvis-presley-all-shook-up-lyrics
Whole lot a shaking going on!
In an ideal world, a rational world, any 'doctor' who refused to treat a patient for any reason would have his or her license revoked. For good. For the good of patients, for the good of medical practice, for the good of having a state where people wouldn't live in fear of being denied life-saving care if some zealot crack pot said no.
Every state should pass legislation, including state constitutional amendments, that require all doctors to provide whatever care is necessary for their patients, regardless of their personal feelings. What's being proposed here is a religious test for medical care. And it's immoral.
👆👆👆👆👆🎯
Oklahoma. Again. Republicans in the Sooner State are not OK.
Do you think they might be trying to outdo FL?
Alabama. Florida is fighting Texas for second worst.
And Louisiana ?
OK. I can see that.
If you can't be the best at something, that's still a type of achievement.
I suppose.
In Health Care alone, Oklahoma ranks next-to-last. It wouldn't take much to supplant Mississippi as worst in Health Care.
Why would someone work at a job where their employment responsibilities involve possibility violating their "ethical, moral, or religious beliefs" in the first place?
Because they're power-mad sociopaths.
Auschwitz is still with us. The Selection Ramp vs mass DNR notices issued without consent for specific demographics, and triage policies and end of life protocols. All linked to capitalism, the ruling class and killing the 'unproductive' in broad daylight
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23040706/
Because they are told to by their preachers, to get these type cases passed. They have found people to sue for every birth control advance made. There's always some gawd-botherer that will sue if told to, and they are gullible enough to claim harm, if told to.
𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝑎𝑛𝑠𝑤𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑑 𝑏𝑦 𝑅𝑒𝑝𝑢𝑏𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑛𝑠 𝑖𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑎𝑚𝑒 𝑜𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝐶ℎ𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑛𝑠 𝑎𝑙𝑤𝑎𝑦𝑠 𝑔𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑟 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑦’𝑟𝑒 𝑑𝑒𝑓𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑝ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑚𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑠 𝑤ℎ𝑜 𝑑𝑜𝑛’𝑡 𝑤𝑎𝑛𝑡 𝑡𝑜 𝑓𝑖𝑙𝑙 𝑎𝑛 𝑜𝑟𝑑𝑒𝑟 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑏𝑖𝑟𝑡ℎ 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑙: 𝑃𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑠 𝑐𝑎𝑛 𝑗𝑢𝑠𝑡 𝑔𝑒𝑡 ℎ𝑒𝑙𝑝 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑠𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑜𝑛𝑒 𝑒𝑙𝑠𝑒.
And when that someone else is a doctor in Albuquerque, 400 miles away, and the paitent is a poor indigenous woman whose only transportation option is public transit? If the Nazis in OK ever pass something like this, the blood of many innocent poor people will be on their hands.
If that patient is in an emergency situation, getting help somewhere else from someone else is not an option. Never let these christian nationalists tell you they're 'pro-life.' It's a lie.
Every time you see "pro-life", substitute "forced birth and controlling women".
Gestational enslaver.
Yes exactly. How is an unconscious and bleeding person supposed to tell the EMT they want to go to a different hospital?
Beyond that, who pays for the second trip? The patient, I assume. Which means conservatives are putting all the costs for some doctor's decision not to treat on the victim of their bigotry.
Make the untreating doctor pay all "find a replacement" costs, then let's see how whether these fundies think it's a good idea.
Telling the EMT they want to go to a differnt hospital may not even work. My late wife was once in a car accident. She was conscious and vocal in her opposition to a particular area hospital. They took her there anyway, because it was the only one with a trauma center. And it wasn't even a conscience matter, that particular hospital had treated her very poorly years earlier, and she had zero trust that they would take proper care of her.
So, the difficulty of going to a different hospital that will treat the patient is compounded by the lack of medical resources in rural areas.
Catch-22. "We have a rule that says you can ask for a different hospital if the doctors at one refuses to treat you. We have another rule that says you don't get to pick your hospital."
sorry Joe to hear that.
It also possible that a patient wouldn't know to object en route because it might be that only after they've arrived at a certain hospital they learn some crack pot doctor won't treat them because of their personal 'feels.'
Quote: "the paitent is a poor indigenous woman whose only transportation option is public transit"
This is crying out for a comment questioning why the GOP would care about those people .....
Elected officials should have NO SAY in medicine! NONE! They aren’t qualified! And if doctors wanna pick a choose, get the fuck out of medicine! Like the military, you take an oath to serve ALL!!!