Religion
Related: About this forumYet another example of grossly unethical catholic health care
Her doctor confirmed the IUD was dislodged and had to be removed. But the doctor said she would be unable to remove the IUD, citing Catholic restrictions followed by Mercy Hospital and Medical Center and providers within its system.
“I think my first feeling was shock,” Jones told Rewire in an interview. “I thought that eventually they were going to recognize that my health was the top priority.”
The doctor left Jones to confer with colleagues, before returning to confirm that her “hands [were] tied,” according to two complaints filed by the ACLU of Illinois. Not only could she not help her, the doctor said, but no one in Jones’ health insurance network could remove the IUD, because all of them followed similar restrictions. Mercy, like many Catholic providers, follows directives issued by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops that restrict access to an array of services, including abortion care, tubal ligations, and contraception.
Another sickening example of putting the invented dictates of an imagined "god" over the welfare of a living, breathing patient. Now we'll see if we get another sickening example of the board's catholic apologists defending it.
https://rewire.news/article/2016/08/23/complaint-citing-catholic-rules-doctor-turns-away-bleeding-woman-dislodged-iud/
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
rug
(82,333 posts)Can't you even try to have a discsusion, scottie?
skepticscott
(13,029 posts)Anything that exposes the catholic church's offenses must, by definition, be flame bait.
But your defense of the refusal of medical care because of...what...religio-doctrine..is duly noted and not surprising in the least.
rug
(82,333 posts)Now if you weren't so blinded by your hate of anything or anyone Catholic, you'd see from the thread posted two days ago that there's something peculiar about this report. It is not against Catholic ethics to remove an IUD, only to insert one.
Oh, and don't try to put words in my mouth. You'll only embarass yourself again.
skepticscott
(13,029 posts)No other way to keep your persecution complex going, ruggie. But you're the only one buying.
As far as the report, if you have evidence that someone is lying, feel free to share it.
rug
(82,333 posts)If I cared, I'd be worried about you.
Fla Dem
(23,542 posts)But your over the top slamming of Catholic DUer's leads me to give you a thumbs down. We're supposed to be the tolerant ones, remember?
skepticscott
(13,029 posts)Sorry, decent people don't "tolerate" that. Guess I'll just have to live with your thumbs-down.
Just because someone is a DUer doesn't mean they don't adhere to and defend some pretty disgusting things. Many have been banned for them when they finally come out.
rug
(82,333 posts)What's that you've got there, scottie? Eight hidden posts?
skepticscott
(13,029 posts)If your network of catholic apologists has evidence that it's bogus, let's see it. If you'd like to try to argue that no catholic health provider would ever deny the best and most appropriate care because of what their "god" says is naughty, knock yourself out.
rug
(82,333 posts)completing extinguishing any semblance of discussion.
Admit it scottie, your sole interest is disruption, not discussion.
Unlike you, I don't rely on a "network" to post here. Although, come to think of it, your network has been understandably absent.
trotsky
(49,533 posts)We don't have to tolerate intolerance, and certainly not at the expense of the health of women.
Fla Dem
(23,542 posts)rigidity in providing health care was ridiculous.
It was the poster's closing comment I felt was insulting to Catholic DUer's and was clearly written to attack them.
In fact I see no DUer defending the action, Catholic or otherwise.
trotsky
(49,533 posts)Thanks to DU's ignore function there are posts I don't see on this thread - given the number I don't see I could only guess that it struck a nerve.
DonViejo
(60,536 posts)there is absolutely no RC prohibition against removing an IUD.
struggle4progress
(118,196 posts)By Leah Hope
Monday, August 22, 2016 05:37PM
CHICAGO (WLS) -- A young woman has filed a discrimination claim against a Chicago hospital claiming a doctor affiliated with the hospital refused her treatment for religious reasons ...
Mercy's Director of Missions said that ... removing the device would not have violated the system's directives ...
http://abc7chicago.com/health/woman-claims-doctor-refused-to-remove-iud-for-religious-reasons-/1480333/
Humanist_Activist
(7,670 posts)which sets the guidelines for Catholic health systems to follow.
Frankly, such rules need to be thrown out, period. No one should put ideology before the needs of their patients.
Lordquinton
(7,886 posts)And this isn't some isolated incident, it's, yet again, another in a far to long line of instances.
Although once is too much when it comes to denying women's health.
