Discouraging
Dec. 19th, 2008 09:29 amUgh, this is a completely horrible development:
Health providers' 'conscience' rule to take effect:
The last-minute Bush administration declaration lets doctors, clinics, receptionists and others refuse to give care they find morally objectionable.
This is especially bad for people in small towns. In several small towns around California, the only hospitals are run by Seventh-Day Adventists, who havesome truly far-out beliefs let's say "a history of curious beliefs" about medical care. I've heard of non-religious doctors getting frozen out, and the nearest non-Adventist care is more than fifty miles away.
The Web is curiously silent about the Adventists' moves, and I can't find much commentary on it beyond allegations of them discouraging abortion. But this eleventh-hour ruling is very disturbing given the domination of rural California health care by a religious group that seems likely to make immediate use of this law.
[Edit: It might be that I should be taking some of the things I hear with a grain of salt, having had limited direct contact with this group.]
Health providers' 'conscience' rule to take effect:
The last-minute Bush administration declaration lets doctors, clinics, receptionists and others refuse to give care they find morally objectionable.
This is especially bad for people in small towns. In several small towns around California, the only hospitals are run by Seventh-Day Adventists, who have
The Web is curiously silent about the Adventists' moves, and I can't find much commentary on it beyond allegations of them discouraging abortion. But this eleventh-hour ruling is very disturbing given the domination of rural California health care by a religious group that seems likely to make immediate use of this law.
[Edit: It might be that I should be taking some of the things I hear with a grain of salt, having had limited direct contact with this group.]
no subject
Date: 2008-12-19 05:42 pm (UTC)I have no idea what the Adventists are up to now. I do know I was delivered by an Adventist OB/GYN ... in a Catholic hospital (named St. Joseph's, in fact) ... and circumcised by a Mohel - who was recommended by the Adventist OB/GYN, on the basis of "if you really want this done, wouldn't you rather have the guy who knows what he's doing than an intern just after a few extra bucks?"
no subject
Date: 2008-12-19 06:17 pm (UTC)And people are wasting time ranting about an empty gesture to appease the Xians at the inauguration.
WTF.
no subject
Date: 2008-12-19 06:37 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-12-19 06:43 pm (UTC)We're already fighting that battle here, over doctors turning away patients who "ignored" their advice about smoking or losing weight.
no subject
Date: 2008-12-19 07:03 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-12-19 07:09 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-12-19 07:23 pm (UTC)Hospital "takeovers?"
Date: 2008-12-20 08:04 pm (UTC)Re: Hospital "takeovers?"
Date: 2008-12-20 08:52 pm (UTC)Anyway, I know of doctors in Ukiah that have been effectively driven out by the Adventist center - never overtly, it's just that their practice becomes impossible to sustain. I am also hearing about people who say they have been denied sufficient pain management medication because "if they put their faith in God they won't need it". Hysteria? Maybe. It didn't happen to me personally, so I can't really know. But if Adventists are scanning the web and jumping on everyone that criticizes them, maybe there's a reason their Web presence looks so controlled?
The Ukiah center has been here for twenty years, it's not as if the domination of medical care by this group has happened overnight. But they did effectively take over - not by "force", but there was enough concern at the time that there was an antitrust investigation, in which the Adventist hospital prevailed.
The fact is that the Adventists have in the past espoused many ideas that are at odds with mainstream medicine, including rejection of pharmaceuticals, and while much of their lifestyle advice is very good and effective, I have very little trust in religious organizations when it comes to separating their religious beliefs from the treatment of patients in a secular context. Particularly following the Bush ruling, when there is no other option for care, and when they openly call me a "sinner". You can imagine why I might be alarmed enough by this to take my medical needs to Kaiser, fifty miles away.
Re: Hospital "takeovers?"
Date: 2008-12-20 11:46 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-12-22 05:10 am (UTC)I seem to remember something like that.
Which could explain the relative silence on the web.
This could be seen as a pointless symbolic gesture that will never be allowed to stand.
But it's fucking sickening and makes me despise these people even more.