Quantcast

Comments about ‘Pro-life health professionals in conflict between conscience and career’

Return to article »

Published: Saturday, March 17 2012 12:10 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Laura Ann
Layton, UT

No one should have to do something that violates their beliefs. If you want an abortion, I believe Planned Parenthood is a viable option. I was informed that they make a lot of money performing this procedure, but I could be wrong about this as I have never looked it into myself. I am generally against abortions, except for rape, incest, or endangerment to the mother, but I can't stop someone from choosing to have an abortion. The Supreme Court ruled that it is legal.

isrred
Logan, UT

What of the police officer forced to arrest someone for Marijuana when the police office believes the law is unjust and immoral to make such a thing criminal and illegal?

What of the county clerk who feels that EVERYONE should be married and that being forced to deny same-sex couples marriage licenses violates her conscience?

Sometimes there are aspects of our jobs that we don't agree with. If they are that unconscionable to you, DON'T TAKE THAT JOB. It's that simple.

annewandering
oakley, idaho

"isrred
Logan, UT
What of the police officer forced to arrest someone for Marijuana when the police office believes the law is unjust and immoral to make such a thing criminal and illegal?

What of the county clerk who feels that EVERYONE should be married and that being forced to deny same-sex couples marriage licenses violates her conscience? "

If a person believes abortion is killing a person then illegal drugs or not marrying someone is hardly a comparable situation. murder vs recreation or marriage? Just not even close.

no fit in SG
St.George, Utah

So many avenues to follow in a nursing career!
Simply go into a different medical specialty, should you find women's health to be offensive to you.

UtahBlueDevil
Durham, NC

How about you don't work for places that force you into the moral problems. Like the officer example who is forced to enforce laws on pot even though he doesn't believe in them.... well my answer is get another job and work where you are not forced to do things you don't believe in. I don't want law enforcement people upholding the law if they don't believe in it..... "sorry, it's my job" doesn't cut it. You chose for it to be your job.

We aren't forced into a cast system. We have choices. Every choice has a benefit and a cost. If the type of medicine you are working in causes issues, move on to something else. No one can make you do a job you don't agree with - you always either choose to do it, or not to.

It is a choice.

teleste
Provo, UT

isrred:

Police officers are sworn in to uphold the law...even if they disagree with it. That is very different from a nurse who was on the books as being opposed to abortion. Beyond that, what might be her responsibility as a healthcare worker to treat a mother whose health is potentially in danger is a NON-ISSUE in this case as the abortion was elective (as I understood it from the article).

It seems to me that going by your logic all Jews who want to be chefs should be forced to cook and serve pork...right? Or just don't take the job...

Give me a break.

JDL
Magna, UT

The sad reality is stated in the last paragraph of this well written and documented article, silence and end all opposition.

sportsfan21
OREM, UT

isrred,

The difference is that both the police officer and the county clerk swore to uphold the law. Medical professionals swear an oath that their only cause is to save lives and not harm them. Most doctors and nurses don't object to aborting pregnancies when the life of the mother is at stake or in cases of rape and incest. But to force a doctor to break his/her solemn oath (that dates back 2500 years) is wrong. In almost any area in the US it is not hard to find an OBGYN that will perform an abortion. Anyone who wants this procedure to be a requirement is looking for acceptance more than accessibility.

USAlover
Salt Lake City, UT

@UtahBlueDevil

"We aren't forced into a cast system. We have choices. Every choice has a benefit and a cost. If the type of medicine you are working in causes issues, move on to something else. No one can make you do a job you don't agree with - you always either choose to do it, or not to.

It is a choice."

We've heard the pro-abortion argument before. Thanks.

The act of that results in a pregnancy is also a "choice". If you don't want a pregnancy, don't engage in the act. Evidently, you and your Pro-Abortion people are only concerned about choices...and not consequences.

No one ever talks about what "choice" that embryo has?

Virgil
SALT LAKE CITY, UT

Strange that the courts will now allow conscientious objections to assisting in abortion, but will allow conscientious objections for prison doctors who refuse to participate in lethal injections (such as in cases in California and North Carolina). Where is the sense in that? Are we now going to say that all doctors must be willing to participate in executions in order to be a doctor?

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

If there's a viable alternative person in the hospital who can perform the procedure then that should be the route taken. If there isn't then well... you're the only one available and you're going to have to deal with it.

AKFan
JUNEAU, AK

Once more a Deseret News article displays a glaring lack of editorial expertise and a factual error. Senator Frank Church was a Democrat from Idaho, and not a Republican as the article states.

On another point, the medical arts are about healing, not taking of life. A health care worker has a perfect right to opt out of procedures that exist only to take life. What Cedar Sanai did in this case was heinous and a gross violation of a person's conscience. I hope a suitable penalty is part of the result of this lawsuit. Health care would take a grave turn if only those willing to take life could be in that profession.

Furry1993
Clearfield, UT

It's very simple. There are just as many different disciplines in the medical profession as there are in any other profession. If a person doesn't want to deal with the need to provide a certain professional service, then choose an area of the profession where that undesirable service isn't involved. When I was practicing law, the idea that I might represent and win an acqittal for a guilty person was not something I wanted to contemplate. I handled it by not practicing criminal defense work since there were many other attorneys who would not have a qualm doing so. Problem solved.

The same is true for those in the medical profession who doin't want to have to be involved with termination of pregnancies. Let them find another area of medicine in which to work. Again, problem solved.

teleste
Provo, UT

@atl134

Wrong.

No doctor or nurse should ever be required to act against their conscience in the case of an elective abortion.

Forcing healthcare workers to act against their conscience infringes their First Amendment rights to the free exercise of religion. It also runs contrary to Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: "Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance."

PRACTICE and OBSERVANCE.

Selling ice cream is legal...that doesn't mean every restaurant should be forced to provide it. Then again, by your logic, each restaurant should be mandated to sell ice cream if it isn't readily-available enough to a demanding customer. Right?

Hawkeye79
Iowa City, IA

This article highlights a very interesting and important debate that will have HUGE implications for our freedoms.

We all enjoy the right to seek an abortion if we so choose, but do we have the right to obtain an abortion from a specific individual? I would suggest that we do not.

Arguing that a medical patient's right to seek a certain procedure implies that they can force any medical care professional to provide that service (even against their will and conscience) is tantamount to arguing that a shopper can force a store to carry and sell cigarettes and alcohol simply because he or she can legally use them. This is simply not the case.

A person's right to seek a treatment does not hinge on whether a specific provider will give it to them. Indeed, they are free to obtain the treatment from locations where it is available. I see no reason why the right to seek a service cannot coexist with health care professionals' right to follow their conscience. Neither party's right is more important than the other party's, therefore neither right should be allowed to overrule the other.

Riverton Cougar
Riverton, UT

There is a big difference in laws preventing you from doing something that they claim is immoral and laws that force you to do something that you believe is immoral. I think the fact that they are still willing to let Jehova's Witnesses not participate in or support local governments (such as not paying taxes or not joining the military), yet they are willing to force those in the medical field to perform or assist in an abortion, is a good sign that the moral compass of the left is way off. It almost seems as if their priority is to promote wickedness (it's obviously I higher priority than receiving revenue from JWs). And people wonder why most LDS are conservatives!

Christy
Beaverton, OR

Abortion falls into the category of women's health. If you don't like that, then choose a different type of medical specialty.

Hawkeye79
Iowa City, IA

Hi Christy,

Let's examine the implications of your suggestion in different fields:

Adult video falls under the category of video. Does that mean that those consumers who are of age to legally obtain adult videos can force any store that sells videos to carry adult videos too? After all, it would seem to fall within that retailer's specialty. Let me guess: you would just tell the store owner that if they don't want to sell adult videos, they shouldn't have entered the field of video sales in the first place, right?

Breast augmentation falls under the category of plastic surgery. Does that mean that all plastic surgeons must provide breast augmentation to any customer who seeks it (after all, they do have a right to seek it)? Would you say that anyone who wants to practice plastic surgery must, by default, offer any and all types of plastic surgeries that are performed within their field? If they don't want to do EVERYTHING that is covered by their field, just choose another field, right?

Sounds silly, right? So it is when forcing anyone to violate their will and conscience.

?
SLC, UT

We need good medical professionals. They need the best education available to them possible. There are some things that some still view to be sacred. What about the Hippocratic Oath to do no harm? However it almost at times seems that Santorum is right in regard to higher education. Not that higher education is bad. The more education you have is better. But those in education who provide the way for new medical professionals and others to develop their skills can place their students who still view certain things to be sacred in situations where their beliefs are compromised. Then places of employment then require staff to go against these beliefs or be fired or possibly not even hired in the first place if they are unwilling to perform procedures the employee believes brings more harm than good. Some say then don't go into those professions. That's not good when we need them.

Christy
Beaverton, OR

Hawkeye79,

I'm talking about women's health, not adult videos.

And here's another tip -- if you don't like abortion, don't have one.

Also, don't try to wipe out sex education in school. (Thank you, Governor Herbert.)

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments