Should Catholic Hospitals be compelled to provide the "morning after pill"?

[Crankyshank]

If the hospital truly is private and receives no gov't funding then no, they should not be compelled to provide it. However I think they should be compelled to instruct the patient that it exists and it is an option (just not from that hospital)

 

[Galahad]

This is not an abortion. This is an induced period - thats it.

But that's not the point. Do those who think it's OK to dictate to providers what they must provide or "get out of the business" also think that we should compel all procedures that are legal to be provided by all possible providers?

 

[JennyMominRI]

The Ct. Legislature is considering a bill that would force all hospitals, including the Catholic Hospitals to provide the "morning after pill" to rape victims. Since the Catholic Church has always had a firm and consistant stance on birth control and abortion, should they be forced to violate their religious convictions to comply with this law? There are other hospitals that rape victims can be treated.

I get to agree with you today..If it's a private hospital,my gut says they have the right to decide what they will and will not do/give..If I see persuasive arguements the other way,I reserve the right to change my mind

 

[LisaNJ25]

The Ct. Legislature is considering a bill that would force all hospitals, including the Catholic Hospitals to provide the "morning after pill" to rape victims. Since the Catholic Church has always had a firm and consistant stance on birth control and abortion, should they be forced to violate their religious convictions to comply with this law? There are other hospitals that rape victims can be treated.

I couldnt even get my catholic hospital to tie my tubes after my 3rd child. I cant see them providing the morning after pill. Although I do think they shoudl provied it.

 

[cardaway]

But that's not the point. Do those who think it's OK to dictate to providers what they must provide or "get out of the business" also think that we should compel all procedures that are legal to be provided by all possible providers?

Difference between one doctor and the rules for an entire facility.

 

[mrsltg]

Most OB/GYN's - by a large margin - do not do elective abortions. Should they be forced to do so or get out of the business?

I suspect you know the answer to this, Galahad....


If a woman wants to take this medication she is free to go elsewhere to get it. I don't like the idea of the stipulation of rape being added to the law in the first place. While reprehensible, I guarantee someone will cry wolf. Further, receiving medicare or medicaid does not make a publically funded hospital. Perhaps if you want to further separate things and say that anyone coming in receiving medicare is entitled to the morning after pill (which amounts to a taxpayer funded abortion - ) while those on private pay are not - maybe. However, the bottom line is the Catholic hospitals are subject to the basic tenets of the Catholic faith. It is not at the discretion of the Connecticut legislature to override Catholic doctrine, in fact I am relatively sure we have a HUGE law about it. And while I'm not positive about the situation in Connecticut, my guess is the state needs the hospital system more than the hospital system needs the state.

Erin

 

[In a hurry]

If the hospital truly is private and receives no gov't funding then no, they should not be compelled to provide it. However I think they should be compelled to instruct the patient that it exists and it is an option (just not from that hospital)

Are there any hospitals that don't receive any Gov't funds? I can't imagine a hospital not taking Medicaid/care patients.

 

[JennyMominRI]

I suspect you know the answer to this, Galahad....


(which amounts to a taxpayer funded abortion - )
Erin

The morning after pill in the vast majority of cases,prevents fertilization,not implantation..

 

[DisneyDotty]

If the GOP fulfills its campaign promise of overturning Roe v. Wade, this could all be a moot point.
Or depending on your understanding of the morning after pill, could be crucial for so many more women...

 

[In a hurry]

The morning after pill in the vast majority of cases,prevents fertilization,not implantation..

Bingo. If there is not fertilization, there is no pregnancy to abort.

 

[Toby'sFriend]

If they are a privately funded hospital, then no I don't believe they should be compelled to practice medicine in a manner against their religious beliefs.
And if their is no other "Public Hospital" in the area, then that is a failing of the Government and Public --- not the Catholics.

What, we think you are not only obligated to provide us with our only medical facility (which we aren't going to help pay for), we also demand that you run the place exactly how we want it to be run!

My problem with the Walgreen pharmacists is that the Corporation contracts with my Insurance company to be the only pharmacy in my area where I can take my prescriptions to be filled and covered by insurance. Nowhere in that agreement are the Walgreens Pharmacists given the right to deny legal prescriptions.... but then a few of them take it upon themselves to not only not fill the Prescription, but in a few places confiscate it so nobody else can fill it either.

That is totally different.

 

[Talking Hands]

It isn't the law yet. The Catholic Church will be lobbying to have themselves exempt. The Catholic hospitals for years have not done abortions, sterilizations, etc because patients know that if that is a procedure that they are seeking, they ought not to seek it in a Catholic hospital. I am sure that law enforcement, ambulance crews and first responders are aware of the policy as well. They can easily take victims, patients and women elsewhere.

This is if the patient has a choice as to what hospital. When I had my first child my doctor practiced at 2 hospitals, one Catholic and the other not. I was promised I would be delivered at the non-Catholic hospital but ended up forced to go to the Catholic hospital when I developed complications.
Frankly I do think the Catholic hospitals should be exempt and the patient have a choice of where to go but unfortunately the choice is not always the patient's.

 

[Galahad]

Difference between one doctor and the rules for an entire facility.

Fair enough. If the facility can be compelled then that facility will need to be sure they will always have individual providers on staff that will comply. Wonder how that measures up to what questions they are allowed to ask an applicant. I think I'll ask around about that. Interesting.

 

[CathrynRose]

But that's not the point. Do those who think it's OK to dictate to providers what they must provide or "get out of the business" also think that we should compel all procedures that are legal to be provided by all possible providers?

As a patient, I should be provided with all aspects of what is availible to me, regarding medical care.

So, if you were at a Jehonvah's Witness Hospital and needed a blood transfusion, youre S.O.L ?

And on this topic - wasnt it the Catholic Church who gave some sort of recogonition to the woman who refused to have an abortion, after being told she was carrying a tubal pregnancy - and of course ended up dying, leaving behind young kids?

 

[Toby'sFriend]

As a patient, I should be provided with all aspects of what is availible to me, regarding medical care.

But should it be left up to the Catholic Religion to provide you with that?
I could accept your stance if you were at a Community Hospital funded with Tax Dollars.

And yes, if the Jehovah Witness religion wanted to start their own hospital to practice medicine within the guidelines of their own religion, why should somebody outside of that religion have the right to walk in their doors and demand they provide their service differently?

 

[mrsltg]

As a patient, I should be provided with all aspects of what is availible to me, regarding medical care.

So, if you were at a Jehonvah's Witness Hospital and needed a blood transfusion, youre S.O.L ?

And on this topic - wasnt it the Catholic Church who gave some sort of recogonition to the woman who refused to have an abortion, after being told she was carrying a tubal pregnancy - and of course ended up dying, leaving behind young kids?

Whoa! This is not a Catholic bashing thread. FTR, I don't know a single Catholic - clergy or otherwise - who would support such a thing.

I can't answer the second question as there are no Jehovah's Witness run hospitals that I am aware of. If they had the funds and ability to open one I think they'd still have a problem with inability to provide a LIFE SAVING procedure. Hospitals must meet minimum standards. Thus far I am unaware of anyone who has died due to lack of emergency contraception. Apples and oranges.

Erin

 

[Crankyshank]

Are there any hospitals that don't receive any Gov't funds? I can't imagine a hospital not taking Medicaid/care patients.

Government funding (ex: grants) is different than payment for services rendered.

 

[In a hurry]

Government funding (ex: grants) is different than payment for services rendered.

I see your point, but somehow it still seems off to me. I guess I still need to think it thru a bit. I am def. not arguing...just still thinking!

It seems that most hosptials receive some sort of money/grants from the government.

 

[JudicialTyranny]

If the GOP fulfills its campaign promise of overturning Roe v. Wade, this could all be a moot point.
Or depending on your understanding of the morning after pill, could be crucial for so many more women...

It's a lie to say that overturning Roe v. Wade is going to outlaw abortions.

Overturning it in the courts (where it should not have been decided in the first place) simply will allow states to decide their own abortion laws. A left wing state like Massachusetts, New York, or California may have liberal abortion laws while others may have more restrictions. It will be up to the state legislatures and governors elected by the people of each state, just like the founding fathers expected things would be done.

Not by dictatorship of the judiciary.

 

[JudicialTyranny]

Catholic hospitals are not for-profit ventures - they were set up years ago to provide a charitable service to communities where such services were lacking.

If I were a cardinal or bishop of a diocese where one of these laws were passed, I would simply announce that the state no longer wishes to have the services of the hospital and it will close before the law goes into effect.

Once the know-it-alls who passed the law realize the devastation that will ensue (loss of jobs, loss of services, burden on other hospitals), they'll soon change their mind. And if not, then they will be held responsible for the aftermath.

I doubt that most cardinals and bishops have the guts to do this though.