HHS Secretary: OB/GYNs w/ Objections To Abortion Should Not Have To Refer Patien

[VivisMom]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3033141

marmar  (1000+ posts)       Wed Mar-19-08 02:33 PM
Original message
HHS Secretary: OB/GYNs w/ Objections To Abortion Should Not Have To Refer Patients To Other Doctors 
 Advertisements [?]from ThinkProgress:



HHS Secretary: OB/GYNs With Objections To Abortion Should Not Have To Refer Patients To Other Doctors»

In November, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) issued new ethics guidelines. Members who have a moral objection to performing abortions are now required to refer their patients to another provider:


Physicians and other health care providers have the duty to refer patients in a timely manner to other providers if they do not feel they can in conscience provide the standard reproductive services that patients request. In resource-poor areas, access to safe and legal reproductive services should be maintained.


The Bush administration has now stepped in to block these guidelines. In a little-noticed letter on Friday, Health and Human Services Secretary Michael Leavitt wrote a letter to the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ABOG), stating that providers with moral objections to abortion should have no obligation to refer patients:


I am writing to express my strong concern over recent actions that undermine the conscience and other individual rights of health care providers.

It appears that the interaction of the ABOG Bulletin with the ACOG ethics report would force physicians to violate their conscience by referring patients for abortions or taking other objectionable actions, or risk losing their board certification.


Leavitt is overly concerned with these physicians who may be forced to “violate their conscience,” but apparently not at all concerned for women who may be turned away from the only accessible health care service. ACOG never stated that board certification would be stripped from doctors who ignore these guidelines.

As OB/GYN Wendy Chavkin of Columbia University told NPR this morning, Leavitt’s policy may also allow physicians to deny a woman who has been raped emergency contraception. Listen here: http://thinkprogress.org/2008/03/19/obgyn-leavitt /


Yesterday, the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice put out a statement supporting ACOG’s “principled and sensible policy,” which would “leave untouched a physician’s right to refuse to provide abortions — a right that has been spelled out in law since 1973 — but would ensure that the patient received the services she needed and wanted.”


http://thinkprogress.org/2008/03/19/obgyn-leavitt /
 

Brand new, so no replies yet. However, I am anticipating a large bonfire.

[DixieBelle]

The ensuing bonfire will make Al Gore weep for the planet.

I wonder, are these taxpayer funded services? If so, that kind of changes the game a little. Of course I'm biased and HATE the fact that my tax dollars support abortion providers like PP.

[jtyangel]

I don't see that they should have to. How hard is it for the woman seeking one to call ob/gyn offices and inquire as to if they provide such a service? People have to do this all the time when searching for doctors who perform say in house labs versus out of office labs or will do minor procedures in the office. It's a simple phone call and this is a 'just' a medical procedure(or so the pro-aborts tell us). These are big girls making their own decisions(so the pro-aborts tell us) and part of that is a responsibility for your health and person. A woman is perfectly capable of calling other providers if her own gyno doesn't provide the service.

[DixieBelle]

^excellent point!!!! They want to make it sound a lot worse than it is. Just like any liberal cause, the agenda is approval and accomodation to the detriment of your own beliefs.

Asshats.

[jtyangel]

^excellent point!!!! They want to make it sound a lot worse than it is. Just like any liberal cause, the agenda is approval and accomodation to the detriment of your own beliefs.

Asshats.

Well, apparently in the liberal rule book when something is legal and a sacred cow right it is not enough that it is accessible and allowable by law. We must also hold the person's hand and guide them through the process and maybe even fund it in order for it to be fully realized as a 'right'. 

[Flame]

It isn't too difficult, as I went the other way when looking for an OB, I asked if they did abortions, and if the answer was yes, I moved on to the next name on my list.