General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsState Senate passes bill allowing doctors to refuse care for moral or ethical reasons
This proposed bill, as well as the other bills that I have heard the Michigan state legislature has been working on/passing in the lame duck session, are beyond horrifying. It is hard to believe that there is actually a state legislature and Governor out there worse then Oklahoma's and my deepest sympathy goes out to the members of DU living in Michigan. How on earth do we deal with legislatures like this?
A bill in the state Legislature would let health care providers, facilities, or insurers deny service based on religious, moral or ethical objections. The state Senate passed the bill Thursday.
------
Critics of the bill say it would let entire health systems deny care.
Democratic state Senator Rebekah Warren said the measure is dangerous, and goes beyond protecting individual doctors rights.
Some religions dont believe in blood transfusions. If you have a health care condition where you need a blood transfusion and you have no one on staff whos willing to give that for you, where do you stand? said Warren.
Others worry that the bill would effectively sanction discrimination.
http://www.michiganradio.org/post/state-senate-passes-bill-allowing-doctors-refuse-care-moral-or-ethical-reasons
OldDem2012
(3,526 posts)RKP5637
(67,111 posts)been unbelievable, anything, even remotely like this. The problem I see is the loonies continue to rise up to higher levels of authority and power because often "we the people" do not pay enough attention to whom we are really voting for. It's ugly, dangerous and crap like this will eventually take this country under with respect to freedom and any sense of privacy and autonomy ... and basic human rights and humanity. In this state, Kansas, they would love to have a theocratic dystopia.
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)OldDem2012
(3,526 posts)ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)according to my mother who was an RN. The level of bias and choosing not to provide care was rampant and accepted.
What has happened is that as more laws and transparency evolved, they are now trying to officially protect what has always been going on informally.
randr
(12,412 posts)Ninga
(8,276 posts)organize!
SoCalNative
(4,613 posts)"We're crazier than Florida, Texas AND Arizona."
rurallib
(62,431 posts)a group of supposedly educated adults would actually vote for something like this is bordering on the unbelievable.
And now the governor has shown that he is every bit as insane as those who voted for it.
RKP5637
(67,111 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)"supposedly educated adults" are "truly fucking insane."
The OP is proof.
RKP5637
(67,111 posts)would have surely signed it ... What blocked it was the democratic senate, now gone with the 2012 elections, and the entire state has a rightwing teabagger government courtesy of the Koch Brothers.
If it comes up again in Kansas, and I'm sure it will, it will get passed with flying colors.
Also, in Kansas, they voted to keep LGBT a criminal offense.
Lovely place.
The Governor of Brownbackistan, Sam Brownback. http://brownbackistan.wordpress.com/
HOUSE APPROVES: Does Kansas Law Legalize Discrimination?
NOTE: This even includes the right to refuse medical treatment if one thought the patient did not agree with their religious beliefs or somehow violated their religious beliefs / freedom of religion.
http://www.advocate.com/news/daily-news/2012/03/29/house-approves-kansas-law-legalize-discrimination
Members of both parties joined together in the House on the 89-27 vote, according to the Lawrence Journal-World. If the Senate follows suit and Governor Sam Brownback signs the bill, as he has indicted, then anyone could opt out of anti-discrimination laws that protect gays and lesbians by claiming they violate their "religious freedom."
For example, an employer could fire someone if they discovered the employee was gay. Or a landlord could kick a renter out of their home. The religious exemption extends past places of business to universities, where students or instructors could opt out of a school's anti-discrimination policy.
Response to avebury (Original post)
WhoIsNumberNone This message was self-deleted by its author.
get the red out
(13,468 posts)They wish to see people suffer, that's what they are about now.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)The Gerrymandering is killing us as far as the legislature goes. Nothing can be done about that in the short term. We just need to keep that below a veto proof majority in at least one house, then take the Governorship and never let it go.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)fact: This is the end result of redistricting: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021971150
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)Also why I said there is nothing we can do about that for now.
Initech
(100,087 posts)muriel_volestrangler
(101,326 posts)Refusal of pregnancy care to an unmarried mother
Refusal of paediatric care to the child of a gay couple
Refusal of care to an overweight person
Refusal of care to an alcoholic
Refusal of contraceptive advice (I don't know, is that already allowed by some idiotic law?)
Refusal of treatment for HIV
This goes far beyond the unlikely "I don't believe in transfusions" example the article gives. There are significant sects that have 'moral and ethical' objections that already have many qualified doctors and nurses. Hell, the RC church owns many of the hospitals in the country, and they have prejudices against unmarried mothers and gay people.