Changing the subject for a moment.

speechlesstx · Jun 4, 2008, 01:58 PM

Susan Estrich asks "Does a doctor have a right to deny treatment to a patient because of her own religious views? Or does a patient have a right to be free from what she sees as wrongful discrimination that consists of denying to her medical treatment that is provided to others?"

Quote:

Lupita Benitez, now 36 and, with her partner of 18 years, the mother of three children, brought the lawsuit against two Christian physicians in San Diego County who refused to inseminate her with donor sperm when she was trying to get pregnant in 1999. She claims that she was denied treatment afforded to other women because of the doctors' personal views about lesbians becoming mothers; attorneys for the doctors claim that it was the fact that Benitez wasn't married, not that she was a lesbian, that led the doctors to refuse treatment to her and that in any event, their religious views give them a right to deny treatment they don't approve of.

Estrich then offers an answer to her questions:

Quote:

Here is my answer to the question of whether doctors who don't believe in abortion should be required to perform abortions: You shouldn't become a gynecologist if you don't want to provide gynecological services, any more than doctors who adhere to Christian Science and disapprove of transfusions should become hematologists, although reasonable people certainly can disagree on that point. But the idea that doctors should be able to discriminate among their patients as to who gets services and who doesn't — based not on medical conditions or necessity, but on the doctors' views, whether religious or otherwise — is an effort to cloak discrimination with a claim to constitutional protection that it does not deserve.

Seems to me that Estrich wants to reserve the right for people to decide what sexual relationships and sexual practices they want to engage in and are ethical, but doctors can't decide what treatments are ethical. Does she have a point or not? Should private physicians have the right to decide who they'll treat or what treatments they'll provide? Should a physician be required to provide abortions, or say, assisted suicide?

tomder55 · Jun 5, 2008, 05:26 AM

you are correct Fr. Chuck ...my position that I stated was the way I thought it should be.

excon · Jun 5, 2008, 06:05 AM

Hello:

I thought the druggists won....

If the state gives you a license, then the state can dictate what services you WILL do and what you will NOT do. I think it's fine for a druggist to abstain from immoral behavior if he so chooses in his OWN life. I do NOT think it's fine for him to impose his views upon his customers.

As a matter of fact, I'll bet the state issues licenses based upon how many drug stores are in a certain area. That could result in only ONE drug store in a little teeny town - and no other town for miles and miles....

Are you going to tell me, that this druggist has the right to make his customers go without a legal and prescribed drug???? I understand that YOU might think the druggist has that right, and he really does. But, the state has the right to take his license away for doing it, and giving it to someone who will serve the needs of his community instead of himself.

IF a business WASN'T required to be licensed, then of course, the business could sell anything they want to whomever they want.

IF these Christian doctors are licensed by the state, the state can require them to perform certain functions. And, it SHOULD.

Do any of you have licenses????? Can you violate the terms of YOUR license because you object to some of them???? I don't think you can. Can a bus driver refuse to ride with a black person because he's offended by them???

excon

tomder55 · Jun 5, 2008, 06:38 AM

I am not aware of a requirement for a license to operate a drug store. A pharmacist needs a profesional license to dispense drugs . I have no doubt there is quid pro quo like having a pharmacy degree.
Here are NY State's requirements :
To be licensed as a pharmacist in New York State you must:

be of good moral character;
be at least 21 years of age;
meet education, examination, and experience requirements; and
be a United States citizen or alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States (Alien Registration Card /USCIS I-551 Status - "Green Card").
NYS Pharmacy - License Requirements

beyond that they don't tell the pharmacist what he can sell or dispense.

excon · Jun 5, 2008, 06:49 AM

Hello again, tom:

I suggest that a druggist is regulated a little more than that. For example, a druggist is required to be licensed by the DEA. They have a few requirements. Actually, they have a HUGE manual:

Pharmacist's Manual - Table of Contents

He's regulated by other agencies, too.

excon

tomder55 · Jun 5, 2008, 06:58 AM

yup a huge manual alright . if you don't mind ,I won't go sifting through it now to try and find the section that compels the pharmacist to dispense medications he is morally opposed to .

speechlesstx · Jun 5, 2008, 07:36 AM

Actually this was about doctors, not pharmacists. Still, I beg to differ, ex but I'm sure that doesn't surprise you. Bars are licensed by the state, restaurants are generally licensed by the local health department, attorneys are licensed by the state, heck, we're licensed by the state to service fire equipment. Are all of us required to offer service to everyone, or forced into practices that are against our conscience? No, absolutely not.

Bars choose to serve or not serve, restaurants choose the right to refuse service to anyone, attorneys decline to take cases and if we don't want to inspect someone's extinguishers or fire alarm we don't. Doctors and clinics can and do "fire" patients all the time. In fact, Texas law allows for an employee of a hospital or clinic - not just a private practice - to refuse to participate in abortions, but apparently not in dispensing EC.

Quote:

§ 103.001. RIGHT TO OBJECT. A physician, nurse, staff member, or employee of a hospital or other health care facility who objects to directly or indirectly performing or participating in an abortion procedure may not be required to directly or indirectly perform or participate in the procedure.

Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 388, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1999.

§ 103.002. DISCRIMINATION PROHIBITED. (a) A hospital or health care facility may not discriminate against a physician, nurse, staff member, or employee, or an applicant for one of those positions, who refuses to perform or participate in an abortion procedure.

At least 4 states have adopted "conscience clauses" for pharmacists and many more have proposed legislation. The usual caveat is that they are required to refer the patient elsewhere or have another pharmacist fill the prescription. I have no problem with that, but I do have a problem with forcing a pharmacist or physician to dispense drugs or provide treatments that violate their conscience - especially when it comes to those the objector believes will cause harm to another person.

Should a pharmacist should be required to dispense drugs for assisted suicide, capital punishment or Viagra for convicted sex offenders? Should a doctor should be forced to administer the lethal cocktail to a condemned prisoner?

excon · Jun 5, 2008, 08:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

a) Should a pharmacist should be required to dispense drugs for assisted suicide, b) capital punishment or c) Viagra for convicted sex offenders? d) Should a doctor should be forced to administer the lethal cocktail to a condemned prisoner?

Hello Steve:

a) If assisted suicide is legal, yes. In Oregon??? Absolutely!
b) Where do you think they get the drugs to kill the condemned? I think they buy 'em at a drug store.
c) Yes, his customers criminal history aren't his business.
d) If he's working for the prison, yes.

Should McDonald's be able to refuse to serve you fat? Should your children's lunch be gone through because eating bad foods might be against the teachers conscience? Why isn't a teachers conscience important when you want her to teach ID, even if she objects on moral grounds? Should cigarettes be made illegal?

excon

speechlesstx · Jun 5, 2008, 08:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by excon

If he's working for the prison, yes.

So you do offer an exception?

margog85 · Jun 6, 2008, 04:23 PM

This is not so much an issue of morality as it is of equality. I find it so strange that people fail to see that. At a point in time, a business could refuse to provide service to someone because they were black. Not anymore. That would seem obsurd to most, correct? But we can discriminate against other people who are 'different' from the majority... namely, in this case, homosexuals. By making discrimination a 'moral' issue, and claiming that NOT discriminating would be against someone's 'religious beliefs', it's condoned. And saying that someone who is in the profession of providing a service has the RIGHT to refuse that service to someone because of their own unfounded biased beliefs about whether they can or cannot parent children (when all studies to date have shown no significant difference between gay parents and straight parents), that is blatant discrimination. No matter how you try to dress it up, that's what it is.



At Ask Me Help Desk you can ask questions in any topic and have them answered for free by our experts. To ask questions or participate in answering them you must register for a free account. By registering you will be able to: Get free answers from experts in any of our 300+ topics. Accept money for answers that you provide. Communicate privately with other members (PM). See fewer ads. Sign Up!