stitch 0 #151 July 23, 2008 If only Atheists take the pill, is it still abortion??"No cookies for you"- GFD "I don't think I like the sound of that" ~ MB65 Don't be a "Racer Hater" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #152 July 23, 2008 Quote Weak. How is saying "I'm sorry, I don't do that procedure/prescribe that medication, but here's a referral to Dr. X, who does" is discriminatory. As long as Dr X is within a reasonable distance, that's fine. Where it becomes a problem is in small towns where the nearest doctor or pharmacy could be miles away. Sometimes that means if Dr. W can't do the procedure and Pharmacist Z won't prescribe the meds, the patient doesn't get the treatment they want. I don't really see a solution to this. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
millertime24 8 #153 July 23, 2008 Elective procedures aren't "treatment".Muff #5048 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #154 July 23, 2008 QuoteElective procedures aren't "treatment". According to Dorland's Medical Dictionary: treatment /treat·ment/ (tret´ment) management and care of a patient Do you feel an elective procedure doesn't involve care and management? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #155 July 23, 2008 QuoteQuoteElective procedures aren't "treatment". According to Dorland's Medical Dictionary: treatment /treat·ment/ (tret´ment) management and care of a patient Do you feel an elective procedure doesn't involve care and management? Certainly it does...but there is no REQUIREMENT to provide care in a non-emergent situation. That's like saying that you would be REQUIRED to represent anyone that walked though your office door.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #156 July 23, 2008 Quote Certainly it does...but there is no REQUIREMENT to provide care in a non-emergent situation. That's like saying that you would be REQUIRED to represent anyone that walked though your office door. Exactly. I agree that it is a problem. I don't think Dr. B should have to provide an abortion if she doesn't want to. However, I'd like to see that previously mentioned 14 year old rape victim get an abortion if she wants one, and not have to travel a hundred miles to do so. I don't have a solution. To address the original post, I absolutely feel that a pharmacist who refuses to dispense birth control, if that was required of him when he accepted the job, should be fired. I feel that a doctor who refuses to provide an abortion if her employer made it clear that was part of the job when she took it should be fired. However, no doctor who runs her own practice should need to provide any service she is not comfortable with, for whatever reason. Ditto if you own the pharmacy. So, if you accept it as terms of your employment, you don't get to change your mind later, but the government shouldn't be telling doctors and pharmacists what they need to do. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
millertime24 8 #157 July 23, 2008 According to Dorland's Medical Dictionary: Patient (pa'shent) [L. patiens] a person who is ill or who is undergoing treatment for disease. Do you feel a preggo is ill or has a disease because of pregnancy?Muff #5048 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #158 July 23, 2008 QuoteAccording to Dorland's Medical Dictionary: Patient (pa'shent) [L. patiens] a person who is ill or who is undergoing treatment for disease. Do you feel a preggo is ill or has a disease because of pregnancy? So now you're saying that pregnant women aren't their OBGYN's patients?! Try this one: Patient 1. A person who is receiving medical treatment, especially in a hospital. 2. A person who is registered with a doctor, dentist, etc and is treated by him when necessary. Dictionary of Cell and Molecular Biology Or this one: Patient: Main Entry: pa·tient Pronunciation: primarystresspamacr-shschwant Function: noun 1 : a sick individual especially when awaiting or under the care and treatment of a physician or surgeon 2 : a client for medical service (as of a physician or dentist) Mirriam Webster's Medical Dictionary (NIH) Or this one: Patient Individuals participating in the health care system for the purpose of receiving therapeutic, diagnostic, or preventive procedures. Online Medical Dictionary And MedTerms.com probably has the most comprehensive definition: Definition of Patient Patient: A person under health care. The person may be waiting for this care or may be receiving it or may have already received it. There is considerable lack of agreement about the precise meaning of the term "patient." It is diversely defined as, for examples: * A person who requires medical care. * A person receiving medical or dental care or treatment. * A person under a physician's care for a particular disease or condition. * A person who is waiting for or undergoing medical treatment and care * An individual who is receiving needed professional services that are directed by a licensed practitioner of the healing arts toward maintenance, improvement or protection of health or lessening of illness, disability or pain. (US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services) * A sick, injured or wounded soldier who receives medical care or treatment from medically trained personnel. (US Army Medical Command) Edited to add: If you're using the copy of Dorland's that's on the Merck website, it's woefully incomplete. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
downwardspiral 0 #159 July 23, 2008 Or... o·ver·kill [oh-ver-kil] –noun 1. the capacity of a nation to destroy, by nuclear weapons, more of an enemy than would be necessary for a military victory. 2. an instance of such destruction. 3. an excess of what is required or suitable, as because of zeal or misjudgment. Hahah couldn't resist. www.FourWheelerHB.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
millertime24 8 #160 July 23, 2008 Not at all. I belive preggers are patients too, however, getting an elective abortion and getting a boob job fall under the same type of "medical care" as its called. They are both elective procedures. That being said; Doctors do not HAVE to perform elective procedures, but will reffer you to a doctor who will do said procedure. Now Ive seen this happen many times personally and the patient has never been inconvenienced in any way. Ive actually seen er doctors call other doctors in to prescribe the "morning after" pill to patients. The only thing inconvenient for the patient is that they have to wait a few more minutes. Same with abortions. Ive seen providers consult clinics downtown that will do the procedure and all of those clinics have been very close by (minutes away). This isnt like skyscam. The people that doctors reffer you to are quite close.Muff #5048 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Squeak 17 #161 July 23, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote Whether the customer elects something or requires something has no relevance to the employee who refuses to serve the customer for personal reasons. If a product or service is legal, putting your personal preferences first is unprofessional. No it's not, in fact to me it shows a higher level of professionalism and integrity. It in no way is unprofessional. People make choices all the time in their professional world, lawyers refuse clients, accountants selectivity choose clients, and Doctors can professionally do the same. You make some pretty broad strokes with your personal biased brushes for an educated man Mr Kallend The discussion, I believe, involves EMPLOYEES refusing to do the legal business of their employer.it's a moot point professionalism is not dictated by employer/ee status. However as a professional i would probably find it difficult to work for n organisation that required me to conduct myself in a manner i did not see as appropriate. There are many many things in both our cultures that are legal, to which a lot of people professional and lay person alike have personal and professional objections to. Having those objection and choosing to uphold their own integrity as nothing to do with their professinalism.You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites sfc 1 #162 July 23, 2008 QuoteI could care less about what you have a problem with, or what your political, religious or social views are. You gave an opinion and that is all that it is, an opinion, and I gave you a way to change it so quit whining. If you don't try and change it and just keep complaining you are just part of the problem and not the solution. This site is all about opinions, if you get you panties in a wad because other people think differently than you then you should stay away. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites sfc 1 #163 July 23, 2008 Quote The change in rules and procedures doesn't require Congress? Hmmm.... ever hear of something called HIPAA? How about so I guess Congress has all these bills about abortion in the Congressional Record just because they wanted to chat about it, then? Ever hear of something called HIPAA? You have your panties wrapped firmly around your neck SOLELY over a newspaper article that SAYS "Bush is going to do such and such..." with no other proof....no memo from the Oval Office, no phone recording, nothing. HIPAA, what has this got to do with this, afaik HIPAA has to do with regulating health insurance and patient privacy, not the ability of the department of health to set rules without congressional approval. This explains what HIPAA is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HIPAA If you are too lazy to look yourself for other sources (I just referenced one) try this one, it is the speaker of the house of representatives, I know you don't like her but if I am wrong about this then so is she, and I think she would know more about this than you. http://www.speaker.gov/blog/?p=1441 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lindsey 0 #164 July 24, 2008 So there's my gratutiude point for the day. I'm grateful to live in a state where I can fire somebody of any reason or no reason at all. They can walk OUT that door if they don't do business the way I say at my place of business. And I'm also grateful that I have the education and expertise to make clinical decisions based on what I believe is appropriate (whether it be a moral, ethical, or medical decision). Unless faced with a real emergent problem, I can CHOOSE what medical treatment I will offer. My decisions are influenced by, but by no means dictated by, a patient's desires. linz-- A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #165 July 24, 2008 I agree with all your points, and well said.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #166 July 24, 2008 I did look for other references...when someone mentions that the government is doing something, I tend to look for legal papers, not blogs or news sites. QuoteWhile current law allows health care providers and professionals to refuse to provide abortions based on their religious beliefs See the bolded, above? HHS doesn't get to change that by fiat - that's why the First amendment says "CONGRESS shall make no law". My reference to all the abortion bills in the Congressional record SHOULD have clued you in to that fact, but you were too busy yelling about the sky falling to figure it out.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites MikeForsythe 0 #167 July 24, 2008 Quote This site is all about opinions, if you get you panties in a wad because other people think differently than you then you should stay away. Where did I say my opinion was different than yours? I did say that I don't care what your opinion is even if it is the same as mine or different. Note to self, use small words and talk slow when responding to some posters.Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites sfc 1 #168 July 24, 2008 Quote Quote This site is all about opinions, if you get you panties in a wad because other people think differently than you then you should stay away. Where did I say my opinion was different than yours? I did say that I don't care what your opinion is even if it is the same as mine or different. Note to self, use small words and talk slow when responding to some posters. Dozens of people reading my posts probably don't care my opinions but they don't all get upset over it, why do you feel the need to make a big deal out of it, this is just a web site, it is not as if we change the world? Relax. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites sfc 1 #169 July 24, 2008 QuoteI did look for other references...when someone mentions that the government is doing something, I tend to look for legal papers, not blogs or news sites. QuoteWhile current law allows health care providers and professionals to refuse to provide abortions based on their religious beliefs See the bolded, above? HHS doesn't get to change that by fiat - that's why the First amendment says "CONGRESS shall make no law". My reference to all the abortion bills in the Congressional record SHOULD have clued you in to that fact, but you were too busy yelling about the sky falling to figure it out. HHS (and many other departments) have the legal right to set policy without going to congress if they stay within the bounds laid out by congress, the bush administration presumably thinks this is one of those cases otherwise they would have gone to congress to change the rules. [sarcasm]Unless of course they are acting above the law but they would never do that[/sarcasm] Redefining the pill as a method of abortion means health providers can refuse that too. Do you understand what this rule change means now? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #170 July 24, 2008 Quotecould you point to where i said "vast majority"? See post 99 of this thread where you claimed "the vast majority of OB/Gyns object to elective abortions for moral reasons."Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #171 July 24, 2008 Quoteotherwise they would have gone to congress to change the rules Um, yeah..it doesn't work THAT way either - how did you get out of high school without taking a government class? Department rule doesn't trunp Federal law. I'd recommend that you do some research on actual laws concerning access to abortive procedures, but I don't want you to break your record in that regard.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #172 July 24, 2008 QuoteWeak. How is saying "I'm sorry, I don't do that procedure/prescribe that medication, but here's a referral to Dr. X, who does" is discriminatory. How is firing someone who refuses to perform the duties required of the job they are being paid to do discrimination? That's the topic at hand.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #173 July 24, 2008 Quote Um, yeah..it doesn't work THAT way either - how did you get out of high school without taking a government class? Department rule doesn't trunp Federal law. Sure it does, at least until it is challenged and a court (or other legal review) determines that policy violates the law. The executive has to interpret laws in order to execute them. Interpretations by the judicial branch, however, trump interpretations by the executive branch. I guess they didn't cover that in your high school government class. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites MikeForsythe 0 #174 July 24, 2008 Quote Dozens of people reading my posts probably don't care my opinions but they don't all get upset over it, why do you feel the need to make a big deal out of it, this is just a web site, it is not as if we change the world? Relax. Are you on drugs? You are the one that is all up in arms about it, I was just giving you a solution. Dang, when my kids used to act like you are I would just send them to their room or make them muck stalls for a while.Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,147 #175 July 24, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote Whether the customer elects something or requires something has no relevance to the employee who refuses to serve the customer for personal reasons. If a product or service is legal, putting your personal preferences first is unprofessional. No it's not, in fact to me it shows a higher level of professionalism and integrity. It in no way is unprofessional. People make choices all the time in their professional world, lawyers refuse clients, accountants selectivity choose clients, and Doctors can professionally do the same. You make some pretty broad strokes with your personal biased brushes for an educated man Mr Kallend The discussion, I believe, involves EMPLOYEES refusing to do the legal business of their employer.it's a moot point professionalism is not dictated by employer/ee status. However as a professional i would probably find it difficult to work for n organisation that required me to conduct myself in a manner i did not see as appropriate. There are many many things in both our cultures that are legal, to which a lot of people professional and lay person alike have personal and professional objections to. Having those objection and choosing to uphold their own integrity as nothing to do with their professinalism. I agree with that, and consequently someone who objects to providing a legal service that their employer pays them to perform should quit and find a job more suited to their preferences. They should NOT stay in the job and expect the government to provide cover for their insubordination.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next Page 7 of 8 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing × Sign In Sign Up Forums Dropzones Classifieds Gear Indoor Articles Photos Videos Calendar Stolen Fatalities Subscriptions Leaderboard Activity Back Activity All Activity My Activity Streams Unread Content Content I Started
sfc 1 #162 July 23, 2008 QuoteI could care less about what you have a problem with, or what your political, religious or social views are. You gave an opinion and that is all that it is, an opinion, and I gave you a way to change it so quit whining. If you don't try and change it and just keep complaining you are just part of the problem and not the solution. This site is all about opinions, if you get you panties in a wad because other people think differently than you then you should stay away. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sfc 1 #163 July 23, 2008 Quote The change in rules and procedures doesn't require Congress? Hmmm.... ever hear of something called HIPAA? How about so I guess Congress has all these bills about abortion in the Congressional Record just because they wanted to chat about it, then? Ever hear of something called HIPAA? You have your panties wrapped firmly around your neck SOLELY over a newspaper article that SAYS "Bush is going to do such and such..." with no other proof....no memo from the Oval Office, no phone recording, nothing. HIPAA, what has this got to do with this, afaik HIPAA has to do with regulating health insurance and patient privacy, not the ability of the department of health to set rules without congressional approval. This explains what HIPAA is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HIPAA If you are too lazy to look yourself for other sources (I just referenced one) try this one, it is the speaker of the house of representatives, I know you don't like her but if I am wrong about this then so is she, and I think she would know more about this than you. http://www.speaker.gov/blog/?p=1441 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lindsey 0 #164 July 24, 2008 So there's my gratutiude point for the day. I'm grateful to live in a state where I can fire somebody of any reason or no reason at all. They can walk OUT that door if they don't do business the way I say at my place of business. And I'm also grateful that I have the education and expertise to make clinical decisions based on what I believe is appropriate (whether it be a moral, ethical, or medical decision). Unless faced with a real emergent problem, I can CHOOSE what medical treatment I will offer. My decisions are influenced by, but by no means dictated by, a patient's desires. linz-- A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #165 July 24, 2008 I agree with all your points, and well said.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #166 July 24, 2008 I did look for other references...when someone mentions that the government is doing something, I tend to look for legal papers, not blogs or news sites. QuoteWhile current law allows health care providers and professionals to refuse to provide abortions based on their religious beliefs See the bolded, above? HHS doesn't get to change that by fiat - that's why the First amendment says "CONGRESS shall make no law". My reference to all the abortion bills in the Congressional record SHOULD have clued you in to that fact, but you were too busy yelling about the sky falling to figure it out.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MikeForsythe 0 #167 July 24, 2008 Quote This site is all about opinions, if you get you panties in a wad because other people think differently than you then you should stay away. Where did I say my opinion was different than yours? I did say that I don't care what your opinion is even if it is the same as mine or different. Note to self, use small words and talk slow when responding to some posters.Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sfc 1 #168 July 24, 2008 Quote Quote This site is all about opinions, if you get you panties in a wad because other people think differently than you then you should stay away. Where did I say my opinion was different than yours? I did say that I don't care what your opinion is even if it is the same as mine or different. Note to self, use small words and talk slow when responding to some posters. Dozens of people reading my posts probably don't care my opinions but they don't all get upset over it, why do you feel the need to make a big deal out of it, this is just a web site, it is not as if we change the world? Relax. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sfc 1 #169 July 24, 2008 QuoteI did look for other references...when someone mentions that the government is doing something, I tend to look for legal papers, not blogs or news sites. QuoteWhile current law allows health care providers and professionals to refuse to provide abortions based on their religious beliefs See the bolded, above? HHS doesn't get to change that by fiat - that's why the First amendment says "CONGRESS shall make no law". My reference to all the abortion bills in the Congressional record SHOULD have clued you in to that fact, but you were too busy yelling about the sky falling to figure it out. HHS (and many other departments) have the legal right to set policy without going to congress if they stay within the bounds laid out by congress, the bush administration presumably thinks this is one of those cases otherwise they would have gone to congress to change the rules. [sarcasm]Unless of course they are acting above the law but they would never do that[/sarcasm] Redefining the pill as a method of abortion means health providers can refuse that too. Do you understand what this rule change means now? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #170 July 24, 2008 Quotecould you point to where i said "vast majority"? See post 99 of this thread where you claimed "the vast majority of OB/Gyns object to elective abortions for moral reasons."Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #171 July 24, 2008 Quoteotherwise they would have gone to congress to change the rules Um, yeah..it doesn't work THAT way either - how did you get out of high school without taking a government class? Department rule doesn't trunp Federal law. I'd recommend that you do some research on actual laws concerning access to abortive procedures, but I don't want you to break your record in that regard.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #172 July 24, 2008 QuoteWeak. How is saying "I'm sorry, I don't do that procedure/prescribe that medication, but here's a referral to Dr. X, who does" is discriminatory. How is firing someone who refuses to perform the duties required of the job they are being paid to do discrimination? That's the topic at hand.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #173 July 24, 2008 Quote Um, yeah..it doesn't work THAT way either - how did you get out of high school without taking a government class? Department rule doesn't trunp Federal law. Sure it does, at least until it is challenged and a court (or other legal review) determines that policy violates the law. The executive has to interpret laws in order to execute them. Interpretations by the judicial branch, however, trump interpretations by the executive branch. I guess they didn't cover that in your high school government class. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MikeForsythe 0 #174 July 24, 2008 Quote Dozens of people reading my posts probably don't care my opinions but they don't all get upset over it, why do you feel the need to make a big deal out of it, this is just a web site, it is not as if we change the world? Relax. Are you on drugs? You are the one that is all up in arms about it, I was just giving you a solution. Dang, when my kids used to act like you are I would just send them to their room or make them muck stalls for a while.Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #175 July 24, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote Whether the customer elects something or requires something has no relevance to the employee who refuses to serve the customer for personal reasons. If a product or service is legal, putting your personal preferences first is unprofessional. No it's not, in fact to me it shows a higher level of professionalism and integrity. It in no way is unprofessional. People make choices all the time in their professional world, lawyers refuse clients, accountants selectivity choose clients, and Doctors can professionally do the same. You make some pretty broad strokes with your personal biased brushes for an educated man Mr Kallend The discussion, I believe, involves EMPLOYEES refusing to do the legal business of their employer.it's a moot point professionalism is not dictated by employer/ee status. However as a professional i would probably find it difficult to work for n organisation that required me to conduct myself in a manner i did not see as appropriate. There are many many things in both our cultures that are legal, to which a lot of people professional and lay person alike have personal and professional objections to. Having those objection and choosing to uphold their own integrity as nothing to do with their professinalism. I agree with that, and consequently someone who objects to providing a legal service that their employer pays them to perform should quit and find a job more suited to their preferences. They should NOT stay in the job and expect the government to provide cover for their insubordination.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next Page 7 of 8 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
