Well...

[agilebrit]

I've updated my user info so that anyone wandering in can't say they weren't warned about my *cough* right of center *cough* political leanings. With the election cycle heating up, I'm sure that I'll be ranting slightly more than usual, although I'll try to keep displays of unseemly glee to a minimum as CBS News (Motto: "Dan Rather--Putting the BS in CBS") goes down in flames. With that being said, something that ginmar posted in her LJ got me to thinking, although I didn't (and won't) post a reply, because the issue is near and dear to my heart, and I'm passionate about it, and I don't want to spooge all over someone else's LJ. However, the news story is here on CNN's site for anyone to read, and I'll probably be posting my take on it in a bit.

Comments

[dragonflymuse.livejournal.com]

As a health care professional, I think what those pharmacists - and now, apparently, physicians - are doing is wrong. Irregardless on what my personal beliefs are on the matter, the guidelines in our Code of Ethics are very clear. And, as someone who has accepted the responsibility of a career in my field, it is my duty to perform my job based on those ethics. Yes, I suppose there are some cases where I would be reluctant - and maybe ever refuse - to provide my services, and most of those are actually supported by my profession's CoE. But the one thing I would not do was hold someone's health, someone's well-being, someone's legally and appropriately prescribed treatment or therapy from them because of my personal values. It is not within my purvue as a professional to jeopardize another's well-being because of my beliefs, and if the day ever came that that was the case, then I would have to find something else to do.

So, my comment on this isn't one based on pro-choice or pro-life rhretoric, but is bound to the professional responsibilities I accepted when I obtained my degree, my license and my job. I think the concluding paragraphs sum up my take on the so-called 'professionals' involved:

Lourdes Rivera, who assists low-income patients as director of the Los Angeles-based National Health Law Program, worries that anti-abortion health providers are gaining too much leeway.

"Yes, we need to respect individual freedom of religion. But at what point does it cross the line of not providing essential medical care? At what point is it malpractice?" she asked. "If someone's beliefs interfere with practicing their profession, perhaps they should do something else."

[agilebrit.livejournal.com]

Well, the part of that last sentence that's significant to me is "essential medical care." If someone's going to die if they don't get an abortion (such as in the case of an ectopic pregnancy), then that's "essential medical care," and I might agree that it's malpractice. If someone just doesn't want the baby because it'll be a huge inconvenience, then they can by golly find another doctor.

[dragonflymuse.livejournal.com]

If someone just doesn't want the baby because it'll be a huge inconvenience, then they can by golly find another doctor.

Which normally wouldn't be that big an issue, but in the article a pharmacist was saying that they would even refuse to do that (refer a patient to a pharmacy that would fill their 'script), and when people's personal beliefs start to weigh in on how they provide care, it is unacceptable. I would imagine finding access to an appropriate physician in your country is about as easy up here (I mean, we have 3 pedi ortho surgeons to cover *4* provinces - wtf?? And only 4 pedi cardiologists, and only *1* pedi gyno).

And, while a child being a 'huge inconvenience' for someone might not seem like a valid argument for termination (or the less extreme 'morning after pill' (hey, mistakes happen), I've seen what can happen to some of these babes when the mothers do have them, and the psychological/social factors of the family must also factor in to such a decision. Personally, if you don't wanna get pregnant, then don't have sex. I don't care if you have sex, but be safe about it - and accept the responsibility for whatever happens (whether you get pregnant or not).

[agilebrit.livejournal.com]

Personally, if you don't wanna get pregnant, then don't have sex. Totally with you there!

I don't think I'd have any trouble finding an appropriate doctor for a service I needed here where I live; we have a College of Medicine at the University in my town, and, in fact, my OB-GYN teaches at it. My pediatrician is ten minutes away, and I have about twelve hospitals and innumerable clinics within a half hour of my house. What the specialist situation is like here, I really don't know, because all of us are disgustingly healthy. My sister was able to receive care for her weird-ass disease in Amarillo, TX (which is not a large city by any stretch of the imagination), so we might have it easier here with our system than you do with yours. More expensive, yes, certainly. But she was never refused care because she couldn't pay for it, either.