Religion out of medicine, a new message for Ontario doctors

[Dion]

comment deleted - not worth it.

[Calgaryborn]

Originally Posted by photon

I don't think making the decision based on if you're going to gain or lose doctors is the right approach. The key issue here is delivery of health care and if a doctor has a right to refuse to deliver specific remedies or advise specific things based on their personal set of morals.

I would hazard to guess the greatest threat to the delivery of health care in Canada would be shortage of Doctors. I see this like any other industry. When there are a shortage of qualified employees you take what you can get. If the guy doesn't produce when he's working alone you make sure their is enough supervision to motivate him. If he has a recurring drinking problem you keep him working away from others who might be inclined to have too many beers after work. If he or she won't work certain of your office hours you accept their restrictions because you've got nobody to replace him/her. What you don't do is make policy changes that might cost you some of your work force.

Originally Posted by photon

Examine some boundary conditions, I mentioned the small town example and birth control, I think your suggestion is a good one though I'm not sure how well that would work in practice (or if it's even legal, you're basically selecting and rejecting doctors for specific positions based on religion).

What about a doctor who refuses to give blood transfusions based on their religion? That strikes me as a clear case where either they do it or aren't allowed to be doctors in the first place. So that's the extreme example of where a doctor should be compelled to take action contrary to their beliefs.. the question is do these fall into that category.

I can't see a legal problem because your not asking for their religious background. You just want to know what common medical procedures they would have a problem preforming. A doctor who wouldn't give blood transfusions certainly couldn't have hospital duties. That would be putting the public at risk. He may not be worth hiring if blood transfusions are sometimes preformed at local clinics as well.

Originally Posted by photon

Maybe each specific thing needs to be examined individually, it's a pretty broad scope of things.. while asking a doctor to give out birth control when they are Catholic is about the same as asking a video store clerk to rent out R rated movies though they'd never watch them themselves, asking a doctor to perform an abortion is a different thing.

I agree if what you are suggesting is that they examine each specific case rather than each specific procedure. A handful of doctors refusing to hand out birth control pills in Toronto is not going to hurt the health of the people of Ontario.

Originally Posted by photon

As for the calling beliefs ridiculous being judgmental, well yeah in some people's judgment they are ridiculous. Everyone makes judgments about things every day. I don't think it's unreasonable either, everyone is allowed to retain and express an opinion on if a belief is good or bad, silly or sound, etc. What I think is unreasonable is that for some reason religious beliefs aren't allowed to be questioned like any other belief. In any statement substitute NDP for religion and if all of a sudden the statement is OK, then it's ok to say for religion too.

I don't see where there has been an intolerance to questions regarding religious beliefs. What I see here is an intolerance to religious beliefs itself. If I was a doctor I would be unwilling to preform an abortion unless the woman was at serious risk of death. You could argue that I should because it is part of my job as a doctor but, you wouldn't sway me. Those soldiers in the German death camps were just doing the job requirement of them too. What this thread is talking about is a rule that would require doctors to throw their convictions out the window or move.

I don't know but, I suspect that this little law is part of a bigger agenda. If every Province follows Ontario's lead you would in effect be disallowing any doctor from training for or practicing medicine in Canada if he is unwilling to commit abortion. What is good for the doctor would also be good for the nurse so I could see a day not too far away where every medical professional would be required to be pro-abortion or at least willing to participate in the practice. I've never heard of a doctor who refused to give birth control pills or one who refused to give blood transfusions. I would imagine their numbers are small. This smells of a pro-abortion tactic.

[The Ditch]

I couldn't care less if all the doctors unwilling to give out birth control or perform an abortion left. I don't think there should be any place for religion in anything the government runs, unfortunately it happens quite often.

[photon]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

I agree if what you are suggesting is that they examine each specific case rather than each specific procedure. A handful of doctors refusing to hand out birth control pills in Toronto is not going to hurt the health of the people of Ontario.

Maybe, though that seems like an administrative nightmare as well as "well Doctor A. doesn't have to why do I", the clear cases are easy, it's the ones in the middle where everyone's going to fight and go to court over.

I can see the point of both sides.

I don't see where there has been an intolerance to questions regarding religious beliefs. What I see here is an intolerance to religious beliefs itself.

Do you mean in general or with respect to this case? I was speaking generally not just about this case.

Generally there's little intolerance to religious beliefs in these parts; intolerance being limiting someone's ability to have those beliefs. Disagreeing with someone or thinking their belief is foolish isn't intolerance.

If I was a doctor I would be unwilling to preform an abortion unless the woman was at serious risk of death. You could argue that I should because it is part of my job as a doctor but, you wouldn't sway me. Those soldiers in the German death camps were just doing the job requirement of them too. What this thread is talking about is a rule that would require doctors to throw their convictions out the window or move.

Yay, the thread's been finally Godwin'd! Clearly those are two completely different things, to conflate them is beyond silly, no point in responding.

I don't know but, I suspect that this little law is part of a bigger agenda. If every Province follows Ontario's lead you would in effect be disallowing any doctor from training for or practicing medicine in Canada if he is unwilling to commit abortion. What is good for the doctor would also be good for the nurse so I could see a day not too far away where every medical professional would be required to be pro-abortion or at least willing to participate in the practice. I've never heard of a doctor who refused to give birth control pills or one who refused to give blood transfusions. I would imagine their numbers are small. This smells of a pro-abortion tactic.

Of course the numbers of doctors who won't dispense birth control pills or give blood transfusions are small, because they select themselves out of the doctor making process. How is this any different? It is a far easier solution than trying to figure out who can do what and who's allowed to refuse to do what. I doubt it's a conspiracy from pro-choice groups but then again maybe it is just the government saying abortion is a safe, legal, accepted medical procedure and doctors should be prepared to administer it like all other medical procedures, if they're not then they shouldn't be doctors.

What I don't understand in all this is aren't doctors specialized? I.e. not every doctor does open heart surgery... Wouldn't abortions be the same way? So if I'm a doctor that won't perform abortions, doesn't that just mean I elect to not specialize in that area and specialize on hip replacements instead?

[MarchHare]

If every Province follows Ontario's lead you would in effect be disallowing any doctor from training for or practicing medicine in Canada if he is unwilling to commit abortion. What is good for the doctor would also be good for the nurse so I could see a day not too far away where every medical professional would be required to be pro-abortion or at least willing to participate in the practice. I've never heard of a doctor who refused to give birth control pills or one who refused to give blood transfusions. I would imagine their numbers are small. This smells of a pro-abortion tactic.

Where did this ridiculous notion that every doctor is going to be forced to provide abortions come from?

Most doctors aren't even qualified to perform the procedure; it's almost always performed by OB/GYN specialists. All these new guidelines are saying is that doctors can't put their personal morality ahead of providing appropriate care for their patients (or referring them to a colleague who will); it's not "forcing" anyone to perform an abortion against their religious beliefs, because anyone who is against abortion wouldn't specialize in that area of medicine to begin with.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

Where did this ridiculous notion that every doctor is going to be forced to provide abortions come from?

Most doctors aren't even qualified to perform the procedure; it's almost always performed by OB/GYN specialists. All these new guidelines are saying is that doctors can't put their personal morality ahead of providing appropriate care for their patients (or referring them to a colleague who will); it's not "forcing" anyone to perform an abortion against their religious beliefs, because anyone who is against abortion wouldn't specialize in that area of medicine to begin with.

Doctors are a part of the process as they make the referals. More to the point, if i was a GP i'd have a hard time giving said person that referal. I wouldn't want to be a part of the abortion process. Chances are i'd ask the patient to get a referal from another GP.