Bishops Sued Over Policies On Abortion At Hospitals
Source: NY Times
The American Civil Liberties Union announced on Monday that it had filed a lawsuit against the nations Roman Catholic bishops, arguing that their anti-abortion directives to Catholic hospitals hamper proper care of pregnant women in medical distress, leading to medical negligence.
Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/03/us/lawsuit-challenges-anti-abortion-policies-at-catholic-hospitals.html?_r=0
perdita9
(1,144 posts)I'm sick of Catholic bullies actively endangering the lives of women
SoapBox
(18,791 posts)I am over hearing anything from The Cult of Pervs and Pointed Hats.
loudsue
(14,087 posts)we could unleash a whole host of anti-abortion rulings.
iandhr
(6,852 posts)... I knew you would have wisdom.
pnwmom
(108,995 posts)It's medical malpractice to let a pregnancy continue after the waters break at only 18 weeks.
And they not only failed to tell her that she should have a therapeutic abortion. They actively interfered with a miscarriage, by giving her medication to stop her contractions after her waters broke.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013/12/02/248243411/aclu-sues-u-s-bishops-says-catholic-hospital-rules-put-women-at-risk
kiranon
(1,727 posts)harmed to make their case.
pnwmom
(108,995 posts)She could have died because of the hospital's poor care.
From the OP link:
The suit was filed in federal court in Michigan on Friday on behalf of a woman who says she did not receive accurate information or care at a Catholic hospital there, exposing her to dangerous infections after her water broke at 18 weeks of pregnancy.
In an unusual step, she is not suing the hospital, Mercy Health Partners in Muskegon, but rather the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops
SNIP
weissmam
(905 posts)warrant46
(2,205 posts)In Clerical Collars with a tenth century Philosophy of Women
DreamGypsy
(2,252 posts)...'nuff said.
Haters Gon Hate
(3 posts)Take religion out of healthcare.
It's a right, not a privelege, and the bishops are celibate. Why do they care about women's parts?
In_The_Wind
(72,300 posts)You've made a very good point.
[img][/img]
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)dembotoz
(16,844 posts)freshwest
(53,661 posts)Dawson Leery
(19,348 posts)WowSeriously
(343 posts)MFrohike
(1,980 posts)On the face of it, this suit really doesn't make sense. The bishops have no duty to the woman regarding her medical care. The logical, and practical, target of a suit like this should be the doctors and the hospital. Given that it's the ACLU, I'd suspect it's an attempt to expand the concept of duty in medical malpractice, but it seems very unlikely to be successful. I'm curious if there's some reason preventing her from suing the hospital or the doctors directly, like a waiver of liability.
Hekate
(90,829 posts)... by which the hospitals must be run on pain of whatever the "corporate directors" can dish out.
Actual women have been harmed; priority is given to the fetus, always. Ireland has a very recent case of an immigrant Indian dentist who was refused a medical surgical abortion despite the fact she was miscarrying, bleeding, and infected. She died of her infection because the doctors presumably detected a heartbeat, or thought they did. Theocracy has a very, very ugly side.
MFrohike
(1,980 posts)It could be Bozo the Clown running the hospital and he still wouldn't owe the patient a duty of care.
Hekate
(90,829 posts)Can you please explain yourself, MFrohike?
Are you saying that if a person, any person, such as maybe yourself, were to enter a hospital, i.e. an institution the public and the law expect will be a safe place for receiving any of the healing arts -- that in fact there is no legal or moral expectation of same?
And why would you say that?
MFrohike
(1,980 posts)I think I see the point of the case and I've been analyzing it completely wrong up to now. It might have a shot.
As for the rest, it's only bizarre if you don't differentiate between different actors.
SunSeeker
(51,726 posts)idwiyo
(5,113 posts)Pterodactyl
(1,687 posts)We wouldn't force Muslim hospitals to serve bacon, would we?
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)Pterodactyl
(1,687 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)okaawhatever
(9,462 posts)longer just a religious organization. If they don't want to comply with laws, they should remain a purely religious organization. Treat only catholics or get out of the business. Religions long ago abandoned a claim to pure religion in the case of health care. They hire
Doctors and nurses who aren't Catholic. They treat people who aren't catholic. they take money from insurance companies that don't align with their faith. Some catholic hospitals and universities had abortion coverage in the insurance before Obamacare. Why would any Catholic sign the Hippocratic Oath if they know they aren't going to honor it? Allowing a woman to die rather than perform an abortion does not meet the standards required by the Hippocratic Oath.
Hekate
(90,829 posts)Pterodactyl
(1,687 posts)left is right
(1,665 posts)I would fight to force them to provide them-despite their religious believe. I would also want Christian Scientist to be forced to prescribe life sustaining drugs
Pterodactyl
(1,687 posts)NutmegYankee
(16,201 posts)No one should ever force their beliefs on another and cause them to die. And yet that's exactly what can happen here.
HockeyMom
(14,337 posts)Ectopic pregnancy which ruptured. No sonogram which would have TOLD them it was life threatening. No BC monitoring. No IV. Nothing. I lay in that hospital bed for hours and hours until my doctor got there and SCREAMED at the hospital staff.
Right to Life? Well how about MY Right to Life. No hope whatsoever for a 5 week embryo, but I was supposed to die too?
Sorry, don't get me started on this.