Physicians refusing to prescribe birth control - Page 2 - Mothering Forums

Reply
 
Thread Tools
#31 of 164 Old 07-08-2004, 06:55 PM
 
3 little birds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 994
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
FTR, I'm not anti-choice. What other people do is their business.

Dr.'s should not be forced to provide services that bother their conscience.

wave.gif
3 little birds is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#32 of 164 Old 07-08-2004, 07:04 PM
 
mama ganoush's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 8,636
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Again, which ethical conerns is it ok for a physician to deny service over? An alcoholic with pancreatitis? An iv drug user with AIDS? Or just women, with their personal family planning issues?
mama ganoush is offline  
#33 of 164 Old 07-08-2004, 07:10 PM
 
3 little birds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 994
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I guess I don't understand what conscience issues are raised with an alcoholic or heroine user. They have a disease that caused their disease.

wave.gif
3 little birds is offline  
 
#34 of 164 Old 07-08-2004, 07:15 PM
 
mama ganoush's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 8,636
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I agre. However, I'm sure we could find doctors who believe that alcohol and drug use are morally wrong. Probably the same lovely group who would deny a grown woman her birth control of choice.
mama ganoush is offline  
#35 of 164 Old 07-08-2004, 07:24 PM
 
3 little birds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 994
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I see what you're saying.

Not to beat a dead horse, but your example made me think of a friend of mine.

Her OB refused to circ her son. Her dh REALLY wanted the circ because he was intact and was made fun of as a child. They found another OB to circ her son.

Should her first OB have circ'd her baby, because the parents' insisted?

wave.gif
3 little birds is offline  
#36 of 164 Old 07-08-2004, 07:25 PM
 
Dragonfly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: On the Brink
Posts: 6,550
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Meiri
And impeding the rights of others is Exactly what a pharmacist refusing to fill a legal prescription for bc pills is doing.
I agree about the pharmacist, as their job is to fill orders, not to give them. But I do believe that doctors should be able to practice in line with their personal ethics. A doctor should be a partner in health, so if his/her ethics aren't in line with the patient's, it's probably a good indicator that that doctor isn't the right one for that patient.
Dragonfly is offline  
#37 of 164 Old 07-08-2004, 08:17 PM
 
BelovedBird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: HOME!! Northern Israel
Posts: 3,195
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jess7396
Would the same be true for a pediatrician who doesn't want to vaccinate, or circumcize? How about an OB who doesn't want to perform elective c-sections? Our old pediatrician felt ritalin was an extremely dangerous drug for children and refused to prescribe it, was he wrong?
Could someone answer these questions please? And mine from above. Pretty please?

ITA with Dragonfly. I do see a difference between the pharmicist and the dr. The pharmicist should not be allowed to refuse to fill perscriptions.

Mom of 5 boys- 13, 10, 8, 2 : and newbie Aug. 24th, '09 . babywearing advocate . Cook, baker, homemaker, wife to a man with another woman's kidney (live altruistic, unknown donor).
BelovedBird is offline  
#38 of 164 Old 07-08-2004, 09:05 PM - Thread Starter
 
chicagomom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: covered in cat hair
Posts: 3,035
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Pro-life organizations already boycott banks and other businesses that do business with companies like Planned Parenthood. It seems like a next logical step for these pro-life organizations to target pharmacies and physicians who dispense & prescribe hormonal & implantation-prevention type birth control. I wonder if this is already being done.
chicagomom is offline  
#39 of 164 Old 07-08-2004, 10:23 PM
 
cappuccinosmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: SW Pennsylvania
Posts: 5,446
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


My parents are two of that despised breed of MD. They refuse to perscribe birth control.

Reasons: They are serious Catholics. They do not want to be accountable for any conceptions terminated by the secondary function of the Pill, shots, and IUD, which they would consider abortions. They do not want to be part of objectifying women and girls by stifling thier fertility and making them purely sexual toys for the men around them.
Because of all this, they feel it would be unethical to perscribe bc. Anyone who disagrees with them is free to find a doctor who's ethics do not restrain them so.
cappuccinosmom is offline  
#40 of 164 Old 07-08-2004, 10:33 PM
 
isleta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: In my son's heart
Posts: 1,096
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I would get a new doctor and most likely inform other friends of their choices.

I feel that is is wrong and that contraceptives should be an option to all sexually active people. However, if a law protects these doctors then either you boycott or try and change the law. I find it a horrible trend that is rising-so I get the word out that this is happening and try my best to get others educated on this trend.

Regarding doctors that don't vax or circ. That's their choice also. However, my son's Dr. has told me to circ. for 3 years and I said no. So, I do have a choice to tell the doctor my opinions and work together to gain a relationship of understanding. She is wonderful in other areas and I usually now see the Nurse Practitioner because ds likes her.
isleta is offline  
#41 of 164 Old 07-08-2004, 10:42 PM
 
Dragonfly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: On the Brink
Posts: 6,550
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by isleta
I feel that is is wrong and that contraceptives should be an option to all sexually active people. However, if a law protects these doctors then either you boycott or try and change the law. I find it a horrible trend that is rising-so I get the word out that this is happening and try my best to get others educated on this trend.

Regarding doctors that don't vax or circ. That's their choice also. However, my son's Dr. has told me to circ. for 3 years and I said no. So, I do have a choice to tell the doctor my opinions and work together to gain a relationship of understanding. She is wonderful in other areas and I usually now see the Nurse Practitioner because ds likes her.
Consider it from the other angle, though: Suppose you wanted to circ your son and your doctor said she would not because it went against her beliefs. Do you think she should be forced to circ him anyway?
Dragonfly is offline  
#42 of 164 Old 07-08-2004, 10:43 PM
 
Dragonfly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: On the Brink
Posts: 6,550
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by the sunshine
So where is the research to control mens fertility? Let's make this their problem then, let's stop those little sperm BEFORE they can fertilize the egg. that seems to be where the problem lies for so many of you.
I'm all for that!

Unfortunately, as long as most of the people doing the research are men, that probably isn't going to happen.
Dragonfly is offline  
#43 of 164 Old 07-08-2004, 11:32 PM
 
andreac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: New England
Posts: 2,492
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Meiri
As the article I read about this issue points out, those pills are medication for more than just birth control. Never mind that the potential abortifacient effect has NOT been proven, these pharmacists and doctors are imposing their own beliefs onto others who don't share them based on SPECULATION. That's not ethics in my book!
I think this point bears repeating. I know several people who have taken the pill for non-contraceptive (is that even a word?) reasons. How could it possibly be ethical to deny medical treatment to a patient?

I'm all for personal choice, but c'mon you chose to be an ob/gyn!! Pick a different specialty!
andreac is offline  
#44 of 164 Old 07-08-2004, 11:34 PM
 
Meiri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Murrysville, PA
Posts: 8,869
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Quote:
Why aren't bc pills available OTC? Does anyone know?
Because the potiential for side effects require a doctor's (or other qualified professional's) supervision.

"What will you do once you know?"
Meiri is offline  
#45 of 164 Old 07-08-2004, 11:36 PM
 
Meiri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Murrysville, PA
Posts: 8,869
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Quote:
They do not want to be part of objectifying women and girls by stifling thier fertility and making them purely sexual toys for the men around them.
Yes, much better to objectify us by making us out to be only baby making incubators with no minds of our own capable of making these decisions for OURSELVES.

I despise being patronized, and that's exactly what That attitude is.

"What will you do once you know?"
Meiri is offline  
#46 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 12:44 AM
 
mshollyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: on the dancefloor,under a discoball
Posts: 2,881
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
a resounding THANK YOU!!!



you people who think you know everything need to get over yourselves. life is never simple.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Meiri
Yes, much better to objectify us by making us out to be only baby making incubators with no minds of our own capable of making these decisions for OURSELVES.

I despise being patronized, and that's exactly what That attitude is.
mshollyk is offline  
#47 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 04:52 AM
 
BoobyJuice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: where eggs fry on the sidewalk
Posts: 1,011
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think everyone should have access to birth control. However, if a Dr. is going to refuse based on a moral objection I can almost understand but I believe they should make that clear from the very beginning. The difference between a Dr. who won't do elective c-sections or circ is that those are medical issues. They are not moral! There is no medical reason to do an elective c-section or circ. Even vaxing, which most Dr.’s feel is a medical necessity, is medical. While I don't necessarily agree with Dr.’s about all things medical, at least that is what they are trained for. If I want someone to make moral judgment that affect my life, I'll turn myself over to a priest, rabbi or a minister. Arguments of when life begins are like argument of
how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Dr.’s can engage in philosophical arguments on their own time, but I'd prefer if they chose to be DR’s, they leave the morals that affect my body up to me.

I completely agree with Dragonfly - how can a pharmacist, who does not sit in on Dr./patient appointments, refuse to fill a legal prescription written
by a Dr.? As it says in the article from the OP
Quote:
"We're seeing a growing trend among pharmacists and medical practitioners who consider it acceptable to impose their morality on women's bodies. I don't think moral aspects should be a concern. Imagine a pharmacist asking a customer whether his Viagra prescription is to enhance sexual performance in his marriage or in an extramarital affair. Never!"
If a pharmacist is going to morally object, should the pharmacy have to have someone else on
at the same time to fill those prescriptions?

This is like arguments about abortion. Yes it is legal. Yes there are still providers. But most women don't have access to them. As mama ganoush said, "but in fully 80% of counties in America, it is not available." I live in a small town. Actually, there is a small town about 20 miles from where I live, which isn't even really a town. There are 3 pharmacies. It is a very religious area - what if all 3 decided not to provide bc? Is it that realistic for all women to drive 100 miles to go to a pharmacy? I know someone mentioned ordering them online, but that just isn't a reality for many women.


OK this post has no flow. It's 1 AM and I need to go to bed. But this kind of stuff drives me crazy. I just feel like the minority religious right is bullying the majority.
BoobyJuice is offline  
#48 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 08:22 AM
 
Ione's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 773
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragonfly
I'm all for that!

Unfortunately, as long as most of the people doing the research are men, that probably isn't going to happen.
ITA 100%... Not to mention the fact that, back in my single days, I would have been *very, very* hesitant to trust a date who said, "don't worry, honey, I'm on the pill". After all, *he* wasn't the one who could end up pregnant if he forgot a pill or two, or was just plain lying to get into my pants.
Ione is offline  
#49 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 09:10 AM
 
Peppermint's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: work-in-progress
Posts: 5,288
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
So, if these Dr.s wouldn't prescribe BC pills b/c of how horrible they are for a woman's body, that would be ok? Since then it would be a medical issue, not a moral one?

As far as this rising trend goes, I looked in the phone books here- there are over 100 OBGYNs in my area, and NONE of them refuse to prescribe BC, and there are no pharmacists in my area who refuse to fill them, I know this, b/c I would take my business to any Dr. or pharmacist who did, but there are simply none here. As for the areas where there is only one OB within 100 miles, I guarantee you that if that one Dr. refused to fill BC prescriptions, some other OB would LOVE to take on that "market", the same is not true for surgical abortions of course, should all OBs be required to perform surgical abortions?

Oh, and there is no medical reason for elecetive C-sections or circ.s? Umm.. take a look at people like Jennifer Berman telling people why elective c's are the "best" way to have a baby , and the numerous Dr.s who still feel that circ. is "necessary" . It wasn't too long ago that the medical commmunity at large (in the US )agreed that circ. was medically necessary , so at that time, any Dr. refusing to do them should've been forced?

:Patty :fireman Catholic, intactalactivist, co-sleeping, GDing, HSing, no-vax Mama to .........................:..........hale:
Peppermint is offline  
#50 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 09:24 AM
 
weebitty2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Lakes Region New Hampshire
Posts: 2,901
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Pharmacists have an ethical obligation (according to the Wisconsin Administrative Code) to refrain from “engaging in any pharmacy practice which constitutes a danger to the health, welfare, or safety of patient or public, including, but not limited to, practicing in a manner which substantially departs from the standard of care.” (Wisconsin Administrative Code, Standards of unprofessional conduct, PHR 10.03).

Now there are some states that are looking into passing measures allowing doctors and pharmacists to refuse to treat/prescribe/dispense based on philosophical or moral beliefs.

So basicaly what they're saying is that it's going to be ok to NOT treat a homosexual HIV patient with the reasoning "Oh, I don't think homosexuality is ok. I hate fags." (no offense meant to those of non-hetero orientations =) )

Hippocratic Oath - modern version -
"I will respect the privacy of my patients, for their problems are not disclosed to me that the world may know. Most especially must I tread with care in matters of life and death. If it is given me to save a life, all thanks. But it may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty. Above all, I must not play at God."

And .. the VERY first item in the Pharmacists' Code of Ethics from the American Pharmaceutical Association.

"*A Pharmacist should hold the health and safety of patients to be of first consideration; he should render to each patient the full measure of his ability as an essential health practitioner."
(entire text : http://www.rphlink.com/therphcode.html )

"*A pharmacist should always strive to perfect and enlarge his professional knowledge. He should utilize and make available this knowledge as may be required in accordance with his best professional judgement."

Now, I may be mistaking here, but that DOES state professional, correct? Not moral, religious, or personal?

I mean, c'mon now. How would this kind of treatment go in other situations?

Hypothetical -

Say I'm a preppy little waitress or a cashier .. and someone goth/punk/lesbian/purple/transvestite/old (take your pick) comes in, and I refuse to serve them because "Oh, I don't think they look/dress/act/are appropriate in this environment."

Would I still have a job? Nope. So is it legal for them just because they went to some college for their occupation?
weebitty2 is offline  
#51 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 09:45 AM
 
RubyV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Western NY (I miss NYC)
Posts: 1,092
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
This is such bullshit.

The PIll is used for many reasons besides bc. I used it to treat my endo for years. Where does a pharmacist get off making a judgement call on the so called immoral use of bcp?

Quote:
They do not want to be part of objectifying women and girls by stifling thier fertility and making them purely sexual toys for the men around them.
The quote above scares the shit out of me. Handmaid's Tale anyone?

What next? Can they refuse treatment because I'm a Pagan? Bisexual? Latina? What's the difference?
RubyV is offline  
#52 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 10:15 AM
 
Missinnyc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 681
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I see a big difference btwn refusing a certain prescription because of it's moral implications, and refusing based on the PERSON or their gender, race, etc. Refusing just because they have a problem with you yourself is obviously not okay. But I feel it's a "slippery slope" (God, I hate that term!) and that we cannot force doctors or pharmacists to do things they feel truly are morally wrong. Forcing someone to (from their perspective) commit an abortion is wrong, if that person truly feels abortion is wrong. And it's condescending and cruel, I think, to say "oh well Hell doesn't exist, don't worry about it" to a person who believes they will be eternally punished for this act.

I would not support doctors being forced to do any procedure they have personal problems with. Doctors are human beings, not automatons. JUst as they should not be forced to circ, or vax, or euthanize, or whatever, if they feel it's wrong, and not in the best interest of the patient.

Mom to 5 wonderful kids (9, 6, 4, 2 and 0), 1 adopted through foster care.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Missinnyc is offline  
#53 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 10:31 AM
 
sohj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: NYC, NY
Posts: 4,081
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I want to point out that there is a DIFFERENCE between morals and ethics.

While what these doctors and pharmacists are doing might be "right" in their moral universe, it is not ethical.

Ethics tell me that I have NO right to impose my moral beliefs on others.

And I hold quite a few moral beliefs that probably the majority here would totally disagree with.

The fact that I hold some rather radical moral beliefs that would affect medical patients kept me from going into medicine. For one brief moment as an early teen, I considered forensic pathology as it would be intellecually stimulating AND it would NOT be inconsistent with my MORAL beliefs and would NOT put me in the position of having to act against my morals in order to behave ethically.

However, since my ETHICS prevent me from telling you all what to do, you can all rest assured that I will not infringe on your rights to live your lives as you chose.

Keep your subjective morals off my body.


--NO FORCED PREGNANCY, NO FORCED STERILIZATION--
sohj is offline  
#54 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 11:56 AM
 
mshollyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: on the dancefloor,under a discoball
Posts: 2,881
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
what kind of a god would eternally punish someone for prescribing or filling a prescription for birth control pills?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MissinNYC
And it's condescending and cruel, I think, to say "oh well Hell doesn't exist, don't worry about it" to a person who believes they will be eternally punished for this act.
mshollyk is offline  
#55 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 12:10 PM
 
cappuccinosmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: SW Pennsylvania
Posts: 5,446
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Hey, where's the tolerance of differing viewpoints? What about "my truth, your truth"? MDC is a bastion of tolerance, except for those who aren't liberal.

My parents aren't forcing thier beliefs on anyone. They will refer patients who want bc to another doctor. But, they believe that perscription bc all has damaging effects on health, the treatment of women, and of course, the abortifacient effect. They are not OB/GYN--family practice, rather. They treat all kinds, regardless of religion, moral codes, gender, whatever. They worked for years in a county health office, where most of thier patients were gay men. They wouldn't hesitate to treat someone for std's, regardless of how they got them, or an alcoholic for alcohol induced disease, or whatever. It is the birth control itself that they cannot in good conscience perscribe, and has nothing to do with the individual people who come to see them. Thier business is *healing*, and they simply do not feel that perscription bc has much to do with healing. If a patient came in with verifiable endometriosis, they might perscribe the Pill, but they'd probably either refer her, or look for a better way to treat it.
cappuccinosmom is offline  
#56 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 01:02 PM
 
JessicaS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 42,757
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
If an OB is going to refuse to prescribe BC then I feel they ought to at least tell people when they are making appts.

Like others stated BC is also used for hormone issues as well as endometriosis.

The sin of Oman IMO had more to do with not doing what God told him to than actually spilling his seed.

Not all those who wander are lost 
JessicaS is offline  
#57 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 01:22 PM
 
sntm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Seattle
Posts: 970
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
As a pro-life, pro-birth control doc who has worked actively in reproductive education (so don't generalize about pro-lifers, okay????), I think that no doctor should be forced to do something that he or she believes causes the loss of life, which is what these doctors believe (and not without reason, though you can argue the validity of the reason.) I think the analogies made above to circs and vaccinations is valid. The discussion about which is medical and which is not is semantic.

Personally, one of the reasons I chose not to go into OB-GYN was because of my views on abortion, not that I felt that I should perform abortions despite my ethical beliefs, but how difficult it would be to survive a residency these days while refusing to participate in abortions. Maybe that is for the best, but maybe a lot of women lost out on an AP, pro-natural birth, no-purely-elective-C-sections OB.

I definitely see the point about women in areas without many options. I'm not sure what the answer is for that one.

FWIW, I stopped taking OCPs partially for this reason, but I still prescribe them -- it's more of a fuzzy area for me and I don't know the right answer. ITA with a PP who said it is an issue of informed consent -- I was a little PO'd when I learned about this and it made me a little sick to think about the times I was lazy with the pill schedule, etc.

Also, FYI, I'm not sure how the FDA makes determinations of OTC or not, but most docs would probably not support making OCPs OTC because of the education required to ensure that they are taken properly (particularly the lower dose pills) and the risk for serious side effects that should be considered, both as an ongoing issue and when first prescribing them (as some are major contraindications and can actually be life-threatening.)

Shannon, mama to Jack :
: : : : : :
sntm is offline  
#58 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 01:24 PM
 
Missinnyc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 681
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Yes, I agree with you about the Onan thing, but that's not the point. Many non Catholics (and Catholics too) see BCP as not just wrong because they are contraception, but because they are abortifacients. That's the opinion. You can argue with it, but that's not the point. The point is, the Dr. sees it as such. He believes that you may kill a life if you take the pill. He believes that he would have been a part of that.

If someone came to me for a gun and said they might shoot someone, I could not give it to them. I totally understand the pro-choice POV and I am not arguing with it, because the point is not whether abortion is wrong or whether the pill is indeed an abortion. The point is, Dr.s (no one) should be forced to commit an act they feel is morally repugnant.

Suppose a man worked in a prison, as a guard. Imagine capital punishment is illegal in this state. Suddenly, it becomes legal, and part of the man's job will now be to escort men to the death chamber or even to pull the lever or whatever. Should he have to do this if he finds the death penalty incredibly wrong? No.

Mom to 5 wonderful kids (9, 6, 4, 2 and 0), 1 adopted through foster care.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Missinnyc is offline  
#59 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 02:16 PM
 
sohj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: NYC, NY
Posts: 4,081
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I cannot think of any other profession that would seriously get to consider taking a "moral" stand on what assignments they get to accept.

Military? Nope. You have a moral qualm about a legal order and you better get yourself out.

Prison guards? Nope. Generally, the guard for executions is volunteer (at least it used to be where I knew people in the prison system), but, although an individual might get to say "no" to a particularly understanding warden, this is not normally acceptable.

Police? Nope. If an officer refuses to uphold a law, whether it is a fair one or not, then he or she is in for a rough time.

Engineering? Not in my experience. Not on moral grounds. I've refused to work with someone who gave me a death threat, but that sure wasn't a moral issue. If I had a moral problem with the assignments I got, I sure would get myself another job.

Lawyers? Nope. Everyone has a right to counsel. Ergo, although a lawyer can say "I'm not the right person for you", that cannot be based on moral issues but on skills and knowledge.

Accountants? Nope. Any legally earned money that someone needs help with in a legal manner is ethically just fine.

Sales? Haven't yet met someone who said they refused to sell certain stuff AND kept their job at whatever place sold said morally objectional things.

If any of the above claimed a moral objection to refuse to do their job, they would be in breech of professional ethics.

Why are doctors so special? (And, on a side note, why do doctors give "orders", but all the other civilian professions give "advice"?)
sohj is offline  
#60 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 04:20 PM
 
Missinnyc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 681
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I see no difference in those other professions. I would expect a solider who thought a war was wrong not to fight, in the other professions you spoke of, no death (real or percieved on the part of the actor) is involved.

Do you REALLY think a person should be forced to do what they consider a murder?

Mom to 5 wonderful kids (9, 6, 4, 2 and 0), 1 adopted through foster care.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Missinnyc is offline  
Reply


User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

Online Users: 17,187

28 members and 17,159 guests
cadence.clair , Deborah , Dovenoir , Fluffer , hillymum , Janeen0225 , JElaineB , lhargrave89 , lisak1234 , Midwestmom2009 , moominmamma , MountainMamaGC , mumto1 , NaturallyKait , redsally , rocky , RollerCoasterMama , samaxtics , shantimama , Skippy918 , sren , tapatio , verticalscope , zebra15
Most users ever online was 449,755, 06-25-2014 at 12:21 PM.