Welcome, GuestLog In or Register »

Articles

Rulers of the Universe

September 23rd, 2008 • Contributed by Lon Newman
Posted in: Policy, Action

Digg This!

In a classic Grimm brothers’ fairy tale, the fisherman’s wife uses wishes given her to gain more and more riches and greater power, until finally she wishes to be the ruler of the universe. The fable teaches the consequences of greed, pride, and it is the ultimate “be careful what you wish for” allegory.

Reproductive health care advocates and providers have written extensively the last few weeks about proposed HHS “conscience protection” regulations — the period for public comment ends this Thursday, September 25.
In Wisconsin, approximately one-third of all health care organizations are religiously affiliated and many workers sign a contract promising to follow the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops Ethical and Religious Directives for Health Care Services. A July letter from the bishops to members of Congress eagerly embraced the regulations. But the bishops may have neglected the fact that many workers in Catholic hospitals and clinics have moral convictions supporting contraceptive care and reproductive rights and other health care the church does not sanction or permit.

If the regulations are adopted, family planning service providers, like us, could be forced to hire people who have moral objections to contraception and we would be unable to discipline employees who refuse to provide birth control or other services central to our mission.  Employees of sectarian health care institutions would operate under the same protections.

For example, clinic employees might refuse to distribute abstinence-only materials because they are incomplete, inaccurate, and deny a patient’s right to informed consent.  They might have a moral conviction to explain that condoms, correctly and consistently used, are a reliable means to prevent unintended pregnancies, and sexually transmitted infections — including HIV transmission to fetuses.

Catholic hospital employees might feel, as a matter of conscience, that to deny information about emergency contraception to a victim of rape is morally wrong or that providing pregnancy options information to a high-risk patient without discussion of termination as well as adoption is willful neglect.

Many health professionals in sectarian medical teaching institutions believe that physicians must be trained in modern contraceptive methods, sterilization procedures, and how to perform emergency abortions.
Earlier this year, a Colorado bill, parallel to these regulations, would have prohibited religion-based hiring discrimination.  It was loudly criticized by Denver Archbishop Chaput, who said the law would “…greatly hinder” organizations like Catholic Charities from maintaining their mission and purpose as specifically religious institutions.”

The federal regulations proposed by Secretary Leavitt and supported by the US Conference of Bishops incorporate moral conviction as well as religious belief and extend to all health care providers receiving federal funds. Speaking from the point-of-view of health care providers who understand unintended consequences, here’s a thought for the bishops and the Bush administration: “Asking for federal protection for employees who refuse to put patient welfare above personal belief may be equivalent to the fisherman’s wife wishing to be the ruler of universe.  By asking to rule everything, they ended up with nothing and there the fairy tale ends.”

3 Comments

  1. Katie said:

    Mr. Newman,

    I feel the need to inform you of a truth that you have either missed or chosen to ignore.

    Abstinence IS the ONLY 100% way to prevent pregnancies, STI’s, HIV. It works every time. Wow, imagine that… We have the answer and yet, somehow, people like you think you have the right to belittle the truth and tell people like me, a 22-year old woman, that sex outside of marriage, as long as it’s “safe,” is not only effective, but good. Quite frankly, I am offended.

    As for “conscience protection,” killing a baby is wrong. Sex outside of marriage is wrong. And any company, hospital, clinic or facility out there that would force me to suggest murder to an unexpected mother or promote and protect the promiscuity of teens and adults DOES NOT have the right to call themselves Health Care. If I remember correctly, Health Care was implemented to promote the health and safety of its community members and patients, not the murder of children and false sense of safe-sex security.

    September 24th, 2008 at 8:46 am #

  2. Frances Irwin said:

    Katie,

    A few points:
    1. No one is challenging, missing, or ignoring the importance of abstinence in the context of sexual health.

    2. No one is suggesting that you would be better off if you were having sex.

    3. Not everyone who would be affected by this rule change is a 22 year old woman who is not having sex based on her personal decision to wait until after marriage. For example, I am a 26 year old female who has been married for 2 years. My husband will be going back to school in January. We’re not ready for our family to grow right now. Or what about my friend who is also married? She’s currently expecting her first child but for a number of years, she and her husband were strongly discouraged from conceiving because a life saving medication he was on would likely have had a devastating affect on the child she carried. Shouldn’t we be able to make this choice based on our personal circumstances rather than having everyone’s choice made based on yours?

    4. Nowhere in this article is it suggested that the decision about engagement in sexual activity or the continuation of a pregnancy should be determined by anyone except the individual(s) directly involved (e.g. the intimate partners, the people who conceived).

    Hope these points are helpful,
    Frances

    September 26th, 2008 at 11:37 am #

  3. Lon Newman said:

    Thank you for your comments, Katie, but I can’t make a rational connection from them to anything I said in the article.

    You feel very strongly about your beliefs and you’re certainly entitled to your opinions.

    –Lon–

    September 29th, 2008 at 1:10 pm #

Post a Comment