Physicians refusing to prescribe birth control - Page 3 - Mothering Forums

Reply
 
Thread Tools
#61 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 04:26 PM
 
Aura_Kitten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Down by the River...
Posts: 6,832
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
I see no difference in those other professions. I would expect a solider who thought a war was wrong not to fight
if they thought going to war was wrong, why are they a soldier?




i think the main point is that if a person has a moral objection to part of their job which makes them unable to do their job fairly and as well as anyone else, they should find another job. if a pharmacist will not fill a prescription for something because of their own ** unproven ** beliefs about it, they should go out and find another job. they shouldn't keep on being a pharmacist and being allowed to deny patients with valid prescriptions the medication that they need.

when we begin taking access to contraceptives out of women's hands... what then?

we are taking so many steps backward in women's rights it terrifies and appalls me.
Aura_Kitten is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#62 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 04:32 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)
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissinNYC
...I would expect a solider who thought a war was wrong not to fight...
Then, what is a soldier's job description?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MissinNYC
Do you REALLY think a person should be forced to do what they consider a murder?
I think a person should have enough self-awareness and lack of self-delusion to realize when a job description doesn't fit their moral system.

And, I think that a person should be ethical enough to keep their moral system to themselves and their fellow-moral-system-sharers.
sohj is offline  
#63 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 04:46 PM
 
JessicaS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 42,757
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
There are many military position which do not involve carrying a weapon. You can also enlist as a concieous objector and they can still find work for you. Also if you object to a particular war you can file as a concious objector and that's fine. (but you HAVE to do it before you are deployed)

Being a soldier doesn't necessarily involve killing.

Not all those who wander are lost 
JessicaS is offline  
 
#64 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 05:06 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)
If one enlists as a soldier and plans to register as a consciencious objector before being deployed, that is trickery. And unethical. If one changes one's mind once in the military, that is a totally different story. And then it would be unethical to remain. One must leave and not endanger one's fellow soldiers by one's refusal to fight.

If one has CO status and is enlisted (which sounds totally wierd to me), one is STILL supporting the war machine and is, therefore, killing. Except, this time it is by proxy. This is also unethical as a conscienscious objector. Red Cross ambulance driver or refugee work (including sanitation support, building, etc.) were the only things I ever heard a CO doing in a war zone.
sohj is offline  
#65 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 05:23 PM
 
JessicaS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 42,757
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I was just clarifying that they had to file before being deployed because once you are given orders, filing CO doesn't go over very well.

Besides, not all soldiers have the option to get out of the military. Some still have time left to be served and stop losses can also prevent a soldier from dropping papers.

Not all those who wander are lost 
JessicaS is offline  
#66 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 05:47 PM
 
simonee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Where the sun don't shine
Posts: 4,866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
So if a pharmacist or doctor can refuse to prescribe/fill a prescription for bc, should they also be able to refuse obese people their cholesterol/diabetes meds? Or to give cancer patients with no hope to be cured chemotherapy? Or should a veg/an doctor be able to not prescribe stuff that includes animal products/research?
simonee is offline  
#67 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 05:54 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)
Or an OB/GYN who is also a member of Zero Population Growth refuse to attend a woman who is having her second or third, etc. child?
sohj is offline  
#68 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 06:24 PM
 
JessicaS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 42,757
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Goodness....

If Drs are going to be like that they are going to have to clarify in their ads in the Yellow Pages. Can you imagine all the possible qualifyers?

Ugh!

Not all those who wander are lost 
JessicaS is offline  
#69 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 06:29 PM
 
Victorian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 2,715
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Whether or not this is legal or ethical (which I believe that it is not), it seems to be happening. I think that we need to start calling insurance companies and complaining that we are paying them. If you go to a DR. and are refused the method of DC that you have the right to choose, that Dr. should not be paid for the visit. Period. If the insurance company continues to support them, the company that issues the issure (you employer) should be complained to. They knew when they got into medicine what it entails. If they don't want to practice according to the standards of practice of their profession then they should not be in it.

Would it be ethical for a skinhead firefighter to refuse to help put out a fire at a jewish community center?

If that doctor is being paid by the government (i.e. medicare) then they should not be allowed to impose a religious believe on you.

I don't know the answer for small towns. This is absolutly TRAGIC in my opinion. These are the same people that picket abortion clinics and then refuse social programs to support mothers.

Victorian

p.s. is anyway sick of the whole Mothering doesn't love me because I'm not a "liberal" crap?
Victorian is offline  
#70 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 06:36 PM
 
phathui5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Oregon
Posts: 17,022
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Quote:
Do doctors have the right to decide not to treat alcoholics, or drug addicts, or smokers? Or gays and lesbians? Or ap parents?
Of course they do. There are moms on here whose doctors have fired them as patients because they weren't going to vax their kids.

Midwife (CPM, LDM) and homeschooling mama to:
14yo ds
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
  11yo dd
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
 9yo ds and 7yo ds
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
and 2yo ds 
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
 
phathui5 is offline  
#71 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 06:44 PM
 
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)
Can someone please tell me how they would feel about pediatricians who don't want to perform circ.s, b/c they believe it is WRONG to mutilate a child? Say it had nothing to do with the lack of medical benefits, but they just felt it was wrong to mutilate a child?

How about my old pediatrician who I mentioned before who refused to prescribe Ritalin, sure he felt it was not a healthy choice, but also- he simply felt that morally, medicating children's behavior was wrong.

Should pediatrics be a practice of only people who think vaccinations are great, circumcision is the "parents choice" and children should be drugged for behavioral problems?

Again- do those who think these Dr.s should be forced to prescribe BC, think that all OBs should have to perform surgical abortions?

:Patty :fireman Catholic, intactalactivist, co-sleeping, GDing, HSing, no-vax Mama to .........................:..........hale:
Peppermint is offline  
#72 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 06:56 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)
Quote:
Originally Posted by phathui5
Of course they do. There are moms on here whose doctors have fired them as patients because they weren't going to vax their kids.
And that is unethical, too.

And those doctors should be castigated and there should be a method to complain about them.
sohj is offline  
#73 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 07:03 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)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jess7396
...Again- do those who think these Dr.s should be forced to prescribe BC, think that all OBs should have to perform surgical abortions?
Yes.

But, they shouldn't force it on their patients. Unlike what they effectively are doing by refusing birth control.

Lots of people get put into situations where they cannot "just say no". Like a submissive wife in a certain kind of marriage. Should she be forced to bear as many children as possible?

My great-grandmother who had seven living children and the mother of my uncle who had 11 both thought birth control, when it came around, was a great idea. It was too late for them, but it was great.
sohj is offline  
#74 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 07:19 PM
 
kama'aina mama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Watching Top Chef, eating Top Ramen
Posts: 19,139
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by abimommy
You can also enlist as a concieous objector and they can still find work for you. Also if you object to a particular war you can file as a concious objector and that's fine. (but you HAVE to do it before you are deployed)

Being a soldier doesn't necessarily involve killing.
I'm sorry but I am pretty certain you are incorrect. If you try to join the military and tell them you are a concientious objector I believe they will send you away. Nor is it acceptable to choose to become a C/O after joining or in relation to a particular action. the only time C/O status comes into play is when there is a draft.. because they can force you to serve but not to kill.
kama'aina mama is offline  
#75 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 07:27 PM
 
JessicaS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 42,757
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Um no, that isn't how it works. You can still be C/O even if you enlist.

There are *many* C/Os in the military right now and we do not have a draft.

Not all those who wander are lost 
JessicaS is offline  
#76 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 08:02 PM
 
kama'aina mama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Watching Top Chef, eating Top Ramen
Posts: 19,139
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
T
Abimommy, you need to check your facts. There are many non-combatant jobs but that is not the same as being a C/O. People in the medical field and the chaplaincy are in non-combatant roles and do not train with or carry weapons as a general rule but they are not C/O's. I just called three different recruiting offices and was told the same thing. They will not accept you if you claim to be a C/O.
kama'aina mama is offline  
#77 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 08:07 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)
Quote:
Originally Posted by abimommy
Um no, that isn't how it works. You can still be C/O even if you enlist.

There are *many* C/Os in the military right now and we do not have a draft.
Then that seems unethical as a c/o ought not to be abetting the killing, either.
sohj is offline  
#78 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 08:26 PM
 
the sunshine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,397
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Doctors refusing to prescribe bc pills are a great example of caring for a **theoretical** fertilized embryo, but not caring at all about the health and safety of an existing fully grown human woman.

I just read elsewhere that a fertilized egg isn't even an embryo until it attaches to the uterine wall. A pregnancy test will not come back positive until this happens, so you aren't pregnant until it attaches.
the sunshine is offline  
#79 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 08:36 PM
 
Aura_Kitten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Down by the River...
Posts: 6,832
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
do those who think these Dr.s should be forced to prescribe BC, think that all OBs should have to perform surgical abortions?
these are two completely different things. there isn't even any scientific evidence that birth control pills actually have the "post fertilization effect" that these people refer to when refusing to give their patients bc pills.

if a doctor doesn't want to perform surgical abortions than they don't become abortionists.

birth control is not only used as a contraceptive but for many other health reasons, as has already been stated.
Aura_Kitten is offline  
#80 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 08:45 PM
 
Missinnyc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 681
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Just curious. If it's true that it's not true (follow me here) that BCP can cause a fertilized egg to be... expunged by making the lining hostile, then why do my old BCP say that this can happen on the label?

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  
#81 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 09:01 PM
 
Aura_Kitten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Down by the River...
Posts: 6,832
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
NYC, i'm not sure i followed you...

do you mean, why does your bc label say that the pills may prevent implantation of a fertilized egg if it isn't true?
Aura_Kitten is offline  
#82 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 09:56 PM
 
lilyka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Sioux Falls, SD
Posts: 17,896
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
NYC- because it is true. The BC manufactuers don't hide this. It is simply how thier product works. This is no mystery. I learned this, and that there were a handful of Dr. and pharmacies that refused to participate in the bc industry 10 years ago when I became sexually active and were examining my choices for my reproductive self (went with NFP).

Ihad a hard time finding a Dr. to treat me for my low thyroid. No big I found anouther. Yes I had ot pay for it out of pocket but my heath is worth it. I couldn't find a Dr. who would take the libility of clipping dd tounge (they thought there was a better way) so I found someone who would. I had to pay out of pocket because medicaid wouldn't cover an elective procedure but her health was worth it. it was those Dr.s right to stick to thier guns and do what they thought was best. I respect them for it but they are no longer my Dr.s because I needed someone who would meet me where they were at.

When I needed my thyroid perscription filled I demanded a certain type of medication. Not what is usually perscribed. I live in a town of 200,000 people we have over 100 pharmacies and no one carried it so I had to have it shipped in. it was thier right not to carry it. I don't know why they would, no one in town perscribes it. (target now orders it in for me and matchs my last price. Ilove them) Was it a hassle to have it shipped in? you bet. Did I want it bad enough to faithfully have it shipped in every month? You bet!! It was hassle but I wasnted the drug bad enough. Perscriptions are easy to get.

Pharmacies are privately owned businesses and they have a right to carry or not carry whatever they want just like any other retail business. I suppose it would be unethical to say " we have this but we aren't giving it to you" but I don't think it would be unethical to say "we do not carry that, you will have to check another pharmacy." Happens all the time here. My thyroid stuff, my friends dhs chemo pills (only one pharmacy carried them). You can't be all things to all people and if you can live with people being ticked off and taking htier business elsewhere then that is up to the owner of the business. If someone doesn't carry or perscribe what you are looking for then GO SOMEWHERE ELSE! You wouldn't sit at the gap and cry because they didn't carry the jeans you wanted and you cuoldn't insist that they start carrying them. Nor would you probably think twice about it. You would just take your business elsewhere. Same with Dr.s and pharmacies. If they don't provide the services you want take your business elsewhere. I don't see what the big deal is really. And I consider Dr.s in private practice to be business owners. If you think Dr.s are some kind of angles of mercy doing it for the warm fuzzies they get wake up and smell the coffee.. they are running business and are offering specific services. There is a growing number of Gynos who won't deliver babies. Now that is a problem. You shouldn't have any ttrouble finding one who will prescribe a pill. And it is good business practice to not prescribe this stuff or sell it. I would prefer someone who refused and I know there is are a lot of other people who seek out these Dr.s (see it all balances out). Enough people to constitute a nationwide directory of who does and doesn't. i do think these Dr.s should be up front so that someone doesn't go through an appointment onl;y to find out that the discussion on BC options is a short one.

If your insurance company only lets you see a Dr. who won' prescribe birth control find another insurance company or try going without. it is very freeing we have been without for most of our 10 years of marraige and are none the worse for it. I am not going to pay anyone that amount of money and have them tell me I can't see a good Dr. and when we were insured I still payed out of pocket for anytyhing they didn't cover. I guess it is thier right as business owners tonot cover whatever so long as it is clearly stated when you buy the product. And health insurance is just that product. don't be surprised when they don't cover things they said they wouldn't cover. Check out the Dr.s before you sign on. Make sure there is one you like.

All this to say I don't see what the big deal is. If you want to pay someone make sure you like them. if you don't then don't buy thier services. : easy enough. Fertility is not a medical problem. Dr. don't have to treat it.pharmacies don't have to sell anything they don't want to sell. You are free to go somewhere else. Heck you can find a Dr. to prescribe and a pharmacy to fill just about anything on the internet.

The truest answer to violence is love. The truest answer to death is life. The only prevention for violence is for the heart to have no violence within it.  We cannot prevent evil through any system devised by mankind. But we can grapple with evil and defeat it, but only with love—real love.

lilyka is offline  
#83 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 10:10 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)
I think what happens w/bcp and iuds is the mfrs play way, WAY down the fact that we're potentially talking about fertilized eggs here. I think many women really don't know that. Of course, the makers of Norplant aren't going to emphasize that when they do their cheery couples-oriented commercials. Bad for sales!

Re pharmacists and drs, I guess again many women just assume this stuff will be available because it is legal. This is one way the pro-life groups have been very successful - eroding away availability for these things even though they remain legal.
chicagomom is offline  
#84 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 10:54 PM
 
Missinnyc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 681
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
klothos- yeah, that's what I meant. I see a lot of women saying in this thread that it's not proven. I admit I don't know much about it, but I wouldn't think the manufacturers would admit it in the packaging if it weren't true. Right?

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  
#85 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 11:09 PM
 
*Erin*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: in a magnolia tree
Posts: 2,389
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
run by posting, i skimmed everyone's responses, and i wanted to jump in and say,you know, i can *almost*understand if a doctor isnt willing to preform abortions, but for a pharmicist, whose job it is to dispense medications, refuses on moral grounds, which are oh so subjective, to dispense medicine that is legal and safe..that's very frightening to me. and dangerous. i think they should not be in pharmacy if they take that much of an issue with bc pills. i also think that if an obgyn isnt willing to learn how to preform abortions, they're not in the right field of medicine. abortion is a legal, surgical procedure.
what's the quote, if men could get pregnant abortion would be a sacrament?
it really lights my fire when men try and exert control (or even voice their opinions, in their professional life) over women's reproductive choices, and women's bodies.

Erin, 33, salty southern mama, sitting by the sea with my DH35, DD10, DS4, &DD2!
*Erin* is offline  
#86 of 164 Old 07-09-2004, 11:57 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)
Ahem,
I would just like to point out that it is not only evil men who refuse to perscribe bcp's, IUD's, or do abortions. My mom is most definately female, definately not quite recovered from youthful feminism , and definately will not perscribe any bc that has a potential abortifacient effect, or do any abortions.

I, also, am female (but not an MD!), and I agree with her. Among the Couple to Couple league doctors that they have met, it's pretty much evenly divided among men and women, all who will not perscribe bc and promote NFP or FAM instead.
cappuccinosmom is offline  
#87 of 164 Old 07-10-2004, 12:29 AM
 
Aura_Kitten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Down by the River...
Posts: 6,832
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
all who will not perscribe bc and promote NFP or FAM instead.
yeah, cuz everyone knows NFP helps control endometriosis...
Aura_Kitten is offline  
#88 of 164 Old 07-10-2004, 12:29 AM
 
lilyka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Sioux Falls, SD
Posts: 17,896
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
I was going to say. I am a woman and I feel 10 times more strongly about this than my dh does. It isn't him evicting the fertilized eggs. It is me. it is my guilt I can't live with. And I can imagine there are just as many female Dr. and pharmasist who are on board as there are men.

and again, pharmacies are private businesses that should be aloowed to sell or not sell what ever they want so long as they aren't discriminating against individuals by saying one person is worthy of this but someone else is not.

And I think there are a lot of people missing the point that there is a need for Dr.s, OBGYNs who will not prefrm abortions. I would not go to someone who did. Then I would be left without medical care. There are plenty of Dr.s for everyone. Let those of us who prefer prolife Dr.s to have them while those of you prefer they weren't can go to the vast magority of Dr.s who aren't.

The truest answer to violence is love. The truest answer to death is life. The only prevention for violence is for the heart to have no violence within it.  We cannot prevent evil through any system devised by mankind. But we can grapple with evil and defeat it, but only with love—real love.

lilyka is offline  
#89 of 164 Old 07-10-2004, 12:59 AM
 
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)
Good point, lilyka! I would not go to a doctor who would perform abortions. One of the (many, many) reasons I do not wish to go back to the local ob/gyn for my next pregnancy has to do with birth control. I (a woman!!!!) *do not want it*, for moral and aesthetic reasons. I do not appreciate being looked on as either a nutcase or a poor oppressed female, and thus I want a doctor caring for me who understands, agrees with, and supports my dh and I in our beliefs on this. Doctors like that are very difficult to find. We are blessed that we know two of them very well.
cappuccinosmom is offline  
#90 of 164 Old 07-10-2004, 01:22 AM
 
Aura_Kitten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Down by the River...
Posts: 6,832
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
you know, this whole issue touches on another topic that's been the subject of discussion in some other threads around here lately ~ why are women giving up their rights and choices just to follow their doctor's orders? why is ANYONE doing this? don't we as patients have the final say in our health care? shouldn't we?

if you don't want an abortion, don't have one. but don't limit others' access to them.

similarly, if you personally object to birth control pills, don't take them.

if you don't believe in vaccinations, you have a right ~ or should have a right ~ not to vaccinate.

if you don't want to circumcise your child, leave them intact.

ultimately, health care providers should provide equal access to all care regardless of their own personal beliefs; if they have a moral objection to an integral part of health care, they should stop doing what they do and find another job.

and we as patients should have the right to choose our own care, and have access to it regardless of what the health care providers believe in. we have the right to make informed choices. our doctors and pharmacists have an obligation to their patients to provide them with accurate, scientifically sound information, and to allow them the basic freedom of making the final choice about their own health care.

someone here said that if pharmacists and doctors are limiting access to contraceptives, and the contraceptives are not available to the general public, then there is an imbalance of power ~ this is completely true. nobody in a place of power should be allowed to exercise their personal ~ moral, ethical ~ beliefs to restrict others' legal choices.
Aura_Kitten 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: 8,513

13 members and 8,500 guests
anacrish , babydoulajo , Deborah , katelove , manyhatsmom , moominmamma , nancy Faye , Ortizmanuella , scaramouche131 , sciencemum , SPrada , Tara 1st Timer , thefragile7393
Most users ever online was 449,755, 06-25-2014 at 12:21 PM.