Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Doctors refusing to perform abortions. Standard. (The procedure isn't even taught in medical schools.) Doctors refusing to provide fetal tissue for stem cells, pharmacists refusing to fill prescriptions. All of these things happen based on peoples' belief that providing such services threatens unborn life. And as much as I don't agree with these decisions, I get it (sort of). If these people feel, really feel, that lives are threatened by their action, then following through is a difficult choice.

But how about when doctors refuse to perform, not abortions, not stem-cell procedures, but in vitro fertilization, which actually helps create life? The California Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case in which two doctors refused a woman IVF treatment because she's a lesbian. Which means that they felt that Guadalupe Benitez and her partner (whom Elizabeth Weil wrote about for Mother Jones last year) did not have the right to the life they hold so dear.

The case, which began in 2001 with Benitez claiming that the doctors violated California's anti-discrimination laws, is seen as one of the most controversial the Court has heard in years. The doctors were not refusing a service—they routinely performed IVF on other patients—but instead cited religious beliefs in this specific instance. The court could find that doctors will have to take an "all-or-nothing" approach, which would mean loss of lucrative IVF business if such doctors stick to their religious standards.



( 11 comments — Leave a comment )
Aug. 3rd, 2007 09:12 pm (UTC)
I'll be interested to see the outcome of the case. I could easily have been in the shoes of those two women.
Aug. 3rd, 2007 09:24 pm (UTC)
:raises hand: Hello? Me over here? My religious beliefs require that I slap these fucking troglodytes into the middle of next week. Yes, sir. Step right over here. Yes, I think this probably will hurt. No, sir, I don't think that makes you just like Jesus.
Aug. 3rd, 2007 09:28 pm (UTC)
*speechless* I hope the fuckers have their medical licenses revoked...for a start.
Aug. 3rd, 2007 11:33 pm (UTC)
That's extremely unlikely. Doctors are allowed to refuse to perform any medically unnecessary care, and IVF is never necessary.
Aug. 3rd, 2007 09:34 pm (UTC)
Bumper sticker I saw yesterday: "If the fetus you save turns out to be gay, will you still defend its rights?"
Aug. 3rd, 2007 09:41 pm (UTC)
That's fucked up. Guh.

Oh is this true? "Doctors refusing to perform abortions. Standard. (The procedure isn't even taught in medical schools.)"

Which procedure? Which medical schools? D&C is taught, yes? I have had them to clean up after a couple of miscarriages, an dthe second one they asked me if it was okay if they had an intern perform the procedure (under supervision) to help her learn.
Aug. 3rd, 2007 09:44 pm (UTC)
That's just all kinds of fucked up right there.
Aug. 3rd, 2007 10:45 pm (UTC)
Don't expect consistency from these people. Once that fetus is born, that sacred life can starve if the mother doesn't have a job.
Aug. 3rd, 2007 10:48 pm (UTC)
In situations like this it always seems that the assholes defending their position have such weak reasons for acting the way they have. Maybe that's just because of my perspective, though.

I am interested in seeing where this case goes.
(Deleted comment)
Aug. 4th, 2007 08:13 am (UTC)
Good God, I hadn't heard that. Are you serious?
(Deleted comment)
Aug. 4th, 2007 10:01 pm (UTC)

Words fucking fail me.

-- A :(
( 11 comments — Leave a comment )