Sunday, April 10, 2005

Who's More Important?

Good review of refusal to treat laws, especially the links at the end of the article:

In particular, Dr. Dunlop does not believe a patient's right to access to care trumps his right to practice according to his moral beliefs. "Is their inconvenience of driving to the next town more important than my conscience?" he asked. "I would say not."

If a patient asked him to do something he morally objected to, Dr. Dunlop said he would "facilitate transfer of care," which he said does not necessarily constitute a "referral."



At 1:58 AM, Anonymous jdt said...

Just curious - I wonder how many of these doctors and pharmacists are adamant in checking marital status before handing out Viagra?

At 5:37 AM, Blogger Joel said...

Difficult ground here. On one hand, I don't want to outlaw contraception or make it impossible for anyone to obtain it.

On the other hand, I don't want to force anyone's hand to perform procedures which go against their conscience.

I side with conscience on this one. No doctor should be forced to go against his or her religious beliefs. No patient should be the thrall of a single doctor.

At 1:34 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Then the doctor should state up front, on his office door and on his letterhead, that he will not be able to properly address his patients' medical needs should they run counter to those beliefs.

And he should list all such contrary needs. That way, his patients can make an informed decision about whether he will be able to do the job they are paying him to do.

But somehow, I suspect that this would be seen as "infringing" on his
"rights", and to the devil with those of his patients.



Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home