Florida health care can now be denied based on moral, ethical, religious beliefs.

[Aldebaran]

I don't get how people who are sick and need medical treatment, when they are presented with medical advice regarding that treatment, then reject it on the basis that they have spent an hour or two on Google and state that they know better than the doctors who are treating her. Rather than listen to her, or her lawyer why don't we have a third-party view from an expert?

And it's hello to Dr. Nick Coatsworth, a fellow of the Royal Australian College of Physicians and an expert in respiratory medicine and infectious diseases. One of the 4 doctors consulting with the Dept. Of Health during covid. He is known to have objected to mandatory vaccinations in the workplace. Mother refused heart transplant because she doesn't have Covid jab

'From a transplant physician's point of view, the biggest risk to you is when we hit your immune system like that, if you get Covid-19 without having the vaccine, then there is a significant risk that organ will die with you,' he said.

See that bit at the end? '...there is a significant risk that organ will die with you.' So if she catches covid without being vaccinated there is a significant risk that she will die. And she says she's 'read up on it' and knows better?

Gimme a break. Has she questioned any of the processes or medications or drugs that she has already received? You can bet she hasn't. Because she wouldn't have the faintest idea about them. But now she's an expert? I'd bet that if they said that they needed to give her a few injections to prevent her from suffering complications if she caught something afterwards then she'd have rolled up her sleeve and thanked the doctor. But someone mentions covid and it's time to call the legal team in.

She's got a 20% chance of dying in the first 12 months following the transplant. And she's complaining about a jab that will help reduce that risk? What a farce...

Well, I see that we have at least one person who doesn't see a problem with medical discrimination.

 

[stevil]

That's exactly what it is.
And here's what it looks like, in Australia, no less: Unvaccinated mom denied life-saving heart transplant accuses hospital of discrimination

Discriminate on race, age, skin colour, religion, sexual orientation, wealth etc.


Vaccination status isn't discrimination. It is a measure to protect people in workplace, in hospitals etc.

 

[Paidiske]

The way I see it, nobody - including medical practitioners - ought to be required to do something that they believe is wrong.* Whether that's euthanasia or abortion or sex change surgery. I have no issue with conscience provisions allowing people to refuse to add something they believe is gravely evil to their scope of practice.

However, I would add several caveats. The above should not be used in such a way that a person cannot access those services from someone who is willing to provide them (ie. if you won't do it, you should refer on to someone who will). And people who do so limit their scope of practice should be willing to make that publicly known up front, so that they don't have patients potentially paying for expensive consultations only to be turned away. And it is the responsibility of the government to make sure that conscience provisions don't mean that (for example) some services are simply not provided in many areas. Conscience provisions should not be used to shame, control or browbeat people seeking any form of medical care. The power imbalance between medical provider and patient should be recognised and the care and welfare of the patient made the highest priority.

And note: this is about the medical procedure or treatment. It's fine, for example, to say, "I don't do elective abortions.' It's not fine to say, happily treat a straight patient but refuse exactly the same treatment to a gay patient. The conscientious objections must be to the action taken by the medical practitioner, not to the patient.

*I don't extend this to (what I see as frankly silly) arguments about things like wedding cakes for same-sex couples because there's nothing intrinsically wrong with baking and selling a cake. Who the buyer is, or what the buyer does with that cake, is not the moral responsibility of the baker.

 

[stevil]

*I don't extend this to (what I see as frankly silly) arguments about things like wedding cakes for same-sex couples because there's nothing intrinsically wrong with baking and selling a cake. Who the buyer is, or what the buyer does with that cake, is not the moral responsibility of the baker.

And typically, what people do with a cake, is eat it,
Regardless of whether its a wedding or not and regardless of whether it is a same sex wedding, a secular wedding or any other type of wedding.
There is no such thing as a gay cake, and a cake is made for eating (typically). Making and selling a cake for profit is business, it isn't an endorsement of the occasion for which the cake is going to be eaten at.

 

[essentialsaltes]

That last part was your own conclusion. It's not based on fact.

Absolutely not. The law sets out what kinds of discrimination are illegal, and by omission what kinds are legal. It's absolutely factual. Being gay is not a protected class under this law, therefore, medical providers with a 'conscience' problem with gay people can deny health care under this law.

 

[Bradskii]

Well, I see that we have at least one person who doesn't see a problem with medical discrimination.

In this case as it was presented? Absolutely 100% no problem whatsoever.

You aren't a doctor so I doubt if you knew without checking (as I did for 3 or 4 minutes) but the woman will be taking immunosuppresents for the restof her life. They stop her body rejecting the new organ, but do you know the contra-indications? From here: Immunosuppressant Drugs: A Complete Overview

...all immunosuppressant drugs carry the serious risk of infection. When an immunosuppressant drug weakens your immune system, your body becomes less resistant to infection. That means they make you more likely to get infections. It also means that any infections get will be harder to treat.

You are up for an organ transplant and you refuse to take medication that will reduce the chances of getting an infection and reduce the severity of one if you did? One, you're an idiot. Two, the doctor should refuse to proceed and spend his time and the money it will cost treating the next person in line.

 

[rjs330]

I don't get how people who are sick and need medical treatment, when they are presented with medical advice regarding that treatment, then reject it on the basis that they have spent an hour or two on Google and state that they know better than the doctors who are treating her. Rather than listen to her, or her lawyer why don't we have a third-party view from an expert?

And it's hello to Dr. Nick Coatsworth, a fellow of the Royal Australian College of Physicians and an expert in respiratory medicine and infectious diseases. One of the 4 doctors consulting with the Dept. Of Health during covid. He is known to have objected to mandatory vaccinations in the workplace. Mother refused heart transplant because she doesn't have Covid jab

'From a transplant physician's point of view, the biggest risk to you is when we hit your immune system like that, if you get Covid-19 without having the vaccine, then there is a significant risk that organ will die with you,' he said.

See that bit at the end? '...there is a significant risk that organ will die with you.' So if she catches covid without being vaccinated there is a significant risk that she will die. And she says she's 'read up on it' and knows better?

Gimme a break. Has she questioned any of the processes or medications or drugs that she has already received? You can bet she hasn't. Because she wouldn't have the faintest idea about them. But now she's an expert? I'd bet that if they said that they needed to give her a few injections to prevent her from suffering complications if she caught something afterwards then she'd have rolled up her sleeve and thanked the doctor. But someone mentions covid and it's time to call the legal team in.

She's got a 20% chance of dying in the first 12 months following the transplant. And she's complaining about a jab that will help reduce that risk? What a farce...

So it is true? She was denied the care?

 

[Bradskii]

So it is true? She was denied the care?

She refused it.

 

[KCfromNC]

Health care providers and payors [e.g. your employer's insurance plan] can deny services based on their moral, ethical and religious convictions​

The legislation defined "conscience-based objection" as based on "a sincerely held religious, moral, or ethical belief." At several points over the legislative session that adjourned last week, Republican lawmakers invoked their Christian beliefs to question the existence of transgender people and support bills that restricted their access to transition-related medical care.

While the legislation says that health care providers can't use it to deny care based on a patient's race, color, religion, sex or national origin, attempts by Democratic lawmakers to extend those protections to gender identity and sexuality failed.

Luckily I don't see political affiliation as one of the protected traits. Should make things interesting when an EMT refuses to treat someone with a Trump bumper sticker who has been in a car crash.

 

[hislegacy]

I find it incredulous that transvestism is the only mental illness that people think can be cured surgically.

I also find it incredulous that it is perhaps the only issue in todays society where science is denied and that denial is accepted as truth in a growing faction of society.

 

[SimplyMe]

I find it incredulous that transvestism is the only mental illness that people think can be cured surgically.

I also find it incredulous that it is perhaps the only issue in todays society where science is denied and that denial is accepted as truth in a growing faction of society.

Care to try again?

Next, I'm not aware of transvestism requiring surgery. To be clear, the medical definition is, "Transvestism involves recurrent, intense sexual arousal from cross-dressing." If you meant Gender Dysphoria, as has been pointed out at least a couple of times, it is not a "mental illness," other than in the claims of conservatives; it is listed in the DSM to ensure those who claim the condition actually have Gender Dysphoria, and not a mental illness masquerading as Gender Dysphoria.

 

[hislegacy]

Gender dysphoria - Symptoms and causes

www.mayoclinic.org

​

A diagnosis for gender dysphoria is included in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), a manual published by the American Psychiatric Association. The diagnosis was created to help people with gender dysphoria get access to necessary health care and effective treatment.​

​

It is a mental illness - and until the last five years has always been a mental interest. Just because societal norms is now accepting the mental illness, does not change the fact that it is.

It is also the only mental illness that openly denies science and is accepted as truth.

It is also the only mental illness that uses surgery to 'cure'.

 

[Aldebaran]

Discriminate on race, age, skin colour, religion, sexual orientation, wealth etc.


Vaccination status isn't discrimination. It is a measure to protect people in workplace, in hospitals etc.

That may be your spin to justify it, but it is still discrimination.

 

[stevil]

That may be your spin to justify it, but it is still discrimination.

OK, well, as you know people are trying to create safe places in order to save lives.
They aren't stopping people out of hate for a type of person.

 

[rjs330]

It seems to me we are talking about specific services that violate conscience and not specific people. So doctors aren't required to perform specific treatment. L

She refused it.

She didn't refuse the heart transplant, she refused the Covid shot. Not the same thing. She was actually denied the care because the Covid shot is not a necessary component of the care. We've been doing this kind of work for a very long time without the Covid vaccine, so it's obviously not necessary. It was a coercive overreach by government.

Gee nest thing you know we'll have to have some sort of mark in order to buy groceries.

 

[essentialsaltes]

It seems to me we are talking about specific services that violate conscience and not specific people.

The law allows for specific people to be refused service. And it covers "any health care service".

 

[Aldebaran]

OK, well, as you know people are trying to create safe places in order to save lives.
They aren't stopping people out of hate for a type of person.

Then the hatred of people labeled as science-deniers, anti-vaxxers, Grandma killers, etc. was.....what, incidental?

 

[rambot]

Can you point to a single instance where a transsexual person was not treated for a broken arm, or fractured rib, or mental illness?

This law was just passed a few days ago non?

Is it a flex to make this claim, correct as it may be?

 

[comana]

It seems to me we are talking about specific services that violate conscience and not specific people. So doctors aren't required to perform specific treatment. L


She didn't refuse the heart transplant, she refused the Covid shot. Not the same thing. She was actually denied the care because the Covid shot is not a necessary component of the care. We've been doing this kind of work for a very long time without the Covid vaccine, so it's obviously not necessary. It was a coercive overreach by government.

Gee nest thing you know we'll have to have some sort of mark in order to buy groceries.

No one is entitled to an organ transplant. There are qualifications and requirements for the patient. If they can’t meet those requirements then no transplant. The organ will go to another who can.

 

[Aldebaran]

This law was just passed a few days ago non?

Is it a flex to make this claim, correct as it may be?

True, but I was responding to what you said in post #14, which seemed to be referring to medical care up to this point:

Enemies of America can get better socialized medical care than transgender americans