Date: 4/13/2007 9:58:00 PM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 9130
when looking up info, I found this:
A woman whose damaged uterus could pose a severe threat to her health in the event of a future pregnancy is not permitted to have a tubal ligation or hysterectomy performed, according to a recently released ruling by a Vatican congregation. The ruling by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith stipulates that the only time a woman is morally permitted to have a hysterectomy is when the uterus is so damaged it presents an immediate threat to her health or life.
 |
Date: 4/13/2007 10:04:00 PM
From Authorid: 26303
I don't think they should have the right to make religous decisions. Only the patient should have that right. What about Seventh Day Adventists, they won't allow blood transfusions, and hospitals (staff) (or so I believe), are always trying to get them to. Seems that it depends on which religion they believe in.  |
Date: 4/14/2007 12:12:00 AM
From Authorid: 12862
Bacl when I was a little younger, my best friends older sister had to ask a priest if it was ok for her to have her tubes tied. She had 6 kids already and could die if she had one more Thats because her hubby, back then they firmly believe were suppose to take care of his wife. i watched a western one day and this guy said the wife better get him some more wires. i have the other foot due also.  |
Date: 4/14/2007 6:42:00 AM
From Authorid: 22188
Most hospitals are privately, and not state, funded. However, your average hospital is subject to state sanctioned rules because they don't have religious affiliations. Catholic hospitals, on the other hand, are like Catholic schools and special considerations are allowed due to religious beliefs. Personally, although I don't agree with many of their practices, I think it's their right right choose what medicines they will and won't prescribe. If I were a doctor and a Catholic, I wouldn't want my conscience burdened by helping other people commit what I considered a sin. That being said, there should be other health care alternatives in your area where you're not bound by Catholic beliefs, and if there is NOT another hospital available, there is probably some legal ground to get things changed...and it NEEDS to be done.  |
Date: 4/14/2007 7:12:00 AM
From Authorid: 27403
That seriously sounds like a private hospital. I cannot believe that they would take emergency (such as paramedics bring in) patients. I would never go to a hospital like that if I could help it! Love and Light  |
Date: 4/14/2007 7:25:00 AM
From Authorid: 62998
In my county, we have 2 hospitals. 1 is privately owned. Meaning that they would get to stable and they ship to the other one. The other Hospital is a not-for-profit Hospital. Which of course means anyone can go there, but the level of care is a lot lower.  |
|
Date: 4/14/2007 8:01:00 AM
From Authorid: 62998
The words "Catholic Hospital" should have been a dead give away that this place was not a free place. Insurance only, or cash/credit at time of treatment. When ever you see a Christian name before a hospital you should know 9 times out 10 it's going to be for profit. |
Date: 4/14/2007 9:08:00 AM
From Authorid: 27046
The hospital I use for OB/GYN services does not write prescriptions for birth control either. They will do the initial pelvic exam and then refer you to planned parenthood with a piece of paper stating you were examined, found to be in good health etc, and you get your prescription written by a doctor there. They also will not tie your tubes either. I don't think it should matter whether the hospital is Catholic based or not....if they take my private insurance that I pay for...and my hard earned cash as a co-payment..and allow medicaid patients to receive care and treatment, then they should be performing certain medical procedures and giving certain medications that the church may not agree with.  |
Date: 4/14/2007 9:08:00 AM
From Authorid: 19345
If it is a Catholic based operation they have the right to practice their beliefs in treatment. People have the option to go to a different hospital as unfair as it sounds  |
Date: 4/14/2007 11:46:00 AM
From Authorid: 16671
If its a faith based hospital they have the right to choose what they will accept and what they will not accept. If a catholic wants her tubes tied and or needs a hysterectomy, then I would tell her to either find another denomination that isnt so strict, or I would tell her to go to a different doctor or hospital that isnt catholic. As far as abortion goes, unless going to a clinic just for that, in hospitals the doctors take an oath to protect life. However I do know of some cases in big city hosptials that do abortions.  |
|
Date: 4/14/2007 3:38:00 PM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 9130
The only other hospitals near by are at least an hour away. |
|
Date: 4/14/2007 6:53:00 PM
From Authorid: 16671
None the less, just as non believers have the right to rip the ten commandments out of schools and courthouses, the faith based church has the right NOT to treat something they do no believe in. |
|
Date: 4/14/2007 9:34:00 PM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 9130
I disagree. A hospital should be unbiased. Doctors should be required to give the care that the CUSTOMER/PATIENT asks for. |
|
Date: 4/15/2007 2:54:00 PM
From Authorid: 16671
And why is that dizzy? If you owned a athesist book store should you then be required to sell me materials on religious books? Hospitals and Doctors offices are paying institutions, if one doesnt like what is offered they are free to find a place where their kind of services are offered. Because I don't believe in abortion should I go to a clinic and demand that they STOP abortions I mean after all you said,hosptials/clincs should be required to give the care that the CUSTOMER/PATIENT asks for and I would be asking for life for those babies. |
|
Date: 4/15/2007 2:55:00 PM
From Authorid: 16671
And if that is not the same why not? |
|
Date: 4/15/2007 9:23:00 PM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 9130
If a hospital is the only place a person can recieve treatment within 60 miles, then they should be required to treat all people, not matter what they look like, who they are, or what they believe. Not everyone that works at the hospital is catholic, so why should they have to follow some silly doctrine? |
Date: 4/16/2007 7:40:00 AM
From Authorid: 11240
What you call "silly" they call "sacred", as in LIFE being sacred, not "silly". If there is no LIFE threatening condition, then to do what is considered sacred versus doing something that someone else may consider "silly" (e.g., have their tubes tied) is their preogative as a privately-owned establishment. God Bless.  |
Date: 4/16/2007 9:20:00 AM
From Authorid: 3125
I am for saving lives. Shouldn't I have just as much right to my belief as the person who does not share my belief? If I opened up a hospital and a person walked in and insisted that I destroy a life, wouldn't that person be attempting to overstep my rights? If my hospital was the only hospital within miles then I would suggest that the people who disagree with my policies to go about getting another hospital in the area that would be more suited for them. That way, no one would be infringing on the rights of others.  |
|
Date: 4/16/2007 5:39:00 PM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 9130
And if it IS life threatening? Should a doctor follow their religious beliefs instead of saving an adult's life? |
|
Date: 4/16/2007 6:27:00 PM
From Authorid: 3125
Dizzy, I don't know of any doctor who would let a person die because of a religious belief. |
Date: 4/16/2007 6:30:00 PM
From Authorid: 15070
Almost happened to me in a Catholic Hospital. I wrote about it here on USM. I know FB had the link @ one point.  |
|
Date: 4/16/2007 6:31:00 PM
From Authorid: 15070
My Doctor (who was Jewish-btw) lost her Hospital Privilages after performing the proceedure. |
