Michigan Preparing To Let Doctors Refuse To Treat Gays

Nurses Activism

Published

Doctors or other health care providers could not be disciplined or sued if they refuse to treat gay patients under legislation passed Wednesday by the Michigan House.

The bill allows health care workers to refuse service to anyone on moral, ethical or religious grounds.

The Republican dominated House passed the measure as dozens of Catholics looked on from the gallery. The Michigan Catholic Conference, which pushed for the bills, hosted a legislative day for Catholics on Wednesday at the state Capitol.

The bills now go the Senate, which also is controlled by Republicans.

The Conscientious Objector Policy Act would allow health care providers to assert their objection within 24 hours of when they receive notice of a patient or procedure with which they don't agree. However, it would prohibit emergency treatment to be refused.

Three other three bills that could affect LGBT health care were also passed by the House Wednesday which would exempt a health insurer or health facility from providing or covering a health care procedure that violated ethical, moral or religious principles reflected in their bylaws or mission statement.

Opponents of the bills said they're worried they would allow providers to refuse service for any reason. For example, they said an emergency medical technicians could refuse to answer a call from the residence of gay couple because they don't approve of homosexuality.

Rep. Chris Kolb (D-Ann Arbor) the first openly gay legislator in Michigan, pointed out that while the legislation prohibits racial discrimination by health care providers, it doesn't ban discrimination based on a person's sexual orientation.

"Are you telling me that a health care provider can deny me medical treatment because of my sexual orientation? I hope not," he said.

"I think it's a terrible slippery slope upon which we embark," said Rep. Jack Minore (D-Flint) before voting against the bill.

Paul A. Long, vice president for public policy for the Michigan Catholic Conference, said the bills promote the constitutional right to religious freedom.

"Individual and institutional health care providers can and should maintain their mission and their services without compromising faith-based teaching," he said in a written statement.

@: http://www.proudparenting.com/page.cfm?Sectionid=65&typeofsite=snippetdetail&ID=1204&snippetset=yes

:stone

Specializes in Community Health Nurse.

How ASININE can they be! :angryfire What the he## is our society coming to? Everyone has a right to equal and fair treatment under the law. Jesus turned no one away for a healing. Who are those docs to deny a human being care! :angryfire I hope the country bands together in protest and keep such stupidity where it belongs............in a land of nonexistence! :angryfire

There was a time when Black people were refused care by White physicians -- and others as well. To me, prejudice has never left our country. It is rearing its ugly head in many ways today, and if we are not careful, soon docs will refuse to treat anyone who isn't rich enough to afford their services. :rolleyes:

On that note.............I'm going to bed, and before I climb into bed I'm going to say a prayer for anyone who has a sick mentality like those docs who are going to refuse to treat ANY person based on their sexual preference. May God have mercy on their lost souls for being so prejudice! :crying2:

Specializes in Critical Care/ICU.
This is so crazy. What is this world coming to.

It's "Christian Conservatism" aka the Bush Administration and a highly Republican government.

I better add that I'm not saying ALL Christians.

.

everything dumb, stupid cannot be laid at bush's doorstep..get real he is not a member of the michigan legislature

i don't know exactly what is in the michigan law...maybe they just have their brains frozen after a particular harsh winter

however this opens the door to even odder discrimination...what about treating left handed people

HOWEVER...a catholic based hospital should not be required to have abortions done in their facility...a jewish hospital shouldnot be required to serve ham and porkchops..

some things should be left to common sense...

if you lost a child to drug use you may not be the best person to care for someone you know is a dealer or user...but you should turn care over to a competent healthcare giver

and as has been noted an emergency room does not have the time to determine what is acceptable and what is not

Specializes in ICU/CCU (PCCN); Heme/Onc/BMT.
everything dumb, stupid cannot be laid at bush's doorstep..get real he is not a member of the michigan legislature

Maybe not directly. BUT. . . his ideologies and policies do set the tone! BIG TIME! ;)

This is a dark time in our history.

Hope this does not pass in Michigan. As someone mentioned, it is wrong on many levels.

:stone

Specializes in ER (new), Respitory/Med Surg floor.
Maybe not directly. BUT. . . his ideologies and policies do set the tone! BIG TIME! ;)

This is a dark time in our history.

Hope this does not pass in Michigan. As someone mentioned, it is wrong on many levels.

:stone

You know I'm getting that vibe too. Just i feel there are no questions about things anymore and looking for or demanding "morally right" when the right is against being a certain sector and i am not sure this right is right and if you don't agree with that right you are condemed.

Yes a certain mindset is going on. I'm finding highschoolers seem to be stating certain religious values yet also talking about their sex exploits. What I'm getting is to be morally correct and demanding it and yet no one is acting civil to one another or thinking civil about different people. I feel it's not just about talking about being right yet it is also fake in ways! If that makes sense I don't know what the solution is well there was one before but too late but even if it was done it may still be that way.

I feel people don't look at all the issues anymore it's about being good character and "morally right" and what i'm seeing is hate agains people deemed "different" such as gays. I'm so sick of that what's morally right? Stuff like the first post stated? I'm also seeing prejudice behavior more and more. My white brother and girlfriend make remarks that I KNOW my parents and myself never made and it's visious. I had some coworker use the n word in front of me. It was only once and i think she stopped it because my mouth hit the floor. Maybe it's not resurgence it's just still there and people who think it's not oh boy it is or feel it's not harmful well it sure is brewing and what's going to come out of here! I really feel hate crimes are in the works or in the future big time. And this mind set is helping it. I'm not blaming anyone for it i really think it just evovled and don't know how to fix it.

Also I really feel the news is such a mess lately it's all garbage! It's not about news it's about ratings. Maybe it's always been that way but we used to do the 5 Ws: Who, What, When, Where, and How (ok that's not w) but a lot of times this is not covered. Some shows are so sensationalize. I watched a network with the Schiavo case and the one comentator who was a particular party that they have these stupid 'talk show' where not much news but banter between 2 parties and it is so obvious on some of them the one party is delibrately made weaker or nasty to inflate the main guy. I do not remember that on most news. It used to be equal let both views say their point and yeah get heated but each knowledgable about their point. Not anymore or you have to keep an eye out for it and realize you may be watching manipulated crap. The problem is i feel the majority don't realize it and watch it anyway or more horribly just don't care!! Anyway they asked the sister and brother of terri when she dies are they planning to charge the husband with murder. Now right now i think they are still or at that time they felt something might happen to intervene and hoping to keep her alive and then to ask that (this is no debate about this case just the news people here i'm getting at)! And they woudn't answer and they kept pressing it on them and you can see in their face they were offended. Not that they won't but just they were upset to begin with and it was just nasty. Yep here i go on a tanget again. And not only that with that case quick i feel anyone in support of the husband at least the protestors in position out the hospice act as if you're anti christian when it is a personal issue between any person and whatever decision is what it is. That's the main thing i can't stand just well if you disagree you're totally wrong and that's that. Sorry but the people i hang out with are a part of this new behavior and the only one who agrees with me is my dad and best friend all the way in fl! See everyone's complacent right now even if they disagree with things and it's driving me nuts. And yeah i'm a wimp i'm too afriad to go against it either. Ok so i'm part of the problem. Ok i'm shutting up now.

Specializes in Public Health, DEI.
everything dumb, stupid cannot be laid at bush's doorstep..get real he is not a member of the michigan legislature

i don't know exactly what is in the michigan law...maybe they just have their brains frozen after a particular harsh winter

however this opens the door to even odder discrimination...what about treating left handed people

HOWEVER...a catholic based hospital should not be required to have abortions done in their facility...a jewish hospital shouldnot be required to serve ham and porkchops..

some things should be left to common sense...

if you lost a child to drug use you may not be the best person to care for someone you know is a dealer or user...but you should turn care over to a competent healthcare giver

and as has been noted an emergency room does not have the time to determine what is acceptable and what is not

I don't believe that Catholic hospitals are under any requirement to perform abortions, are they? In any case, you are talking about a facility having the right to offer specific services and comparing that to a physician refusing to provide services to a specific group of people. As far as I'm concerned, it is unethical and discriminatory. And what do serving or not serving bacon and ham have to do with patient care???

Specializes in Med-Surg, Geriatric, Behavioral Health.

What an article. How ignorant and backward can people become? Refusing to treat because the care giver is just that insecure with him or herself. Homosexuals now. Elderly next. Children who are permanently impaired. This is how socialism at its worst took hold in Nazi Germany long ago. Idiots never cease to amaze me. It still happens, even in our own day and age.

Specializes in Vents, Telemetry, Home Care, Home infusion.

Don't know this website. Has anyone checked to verify if legislation actually introduced?

Specializes in Vents, Telemetry, Home Care, Home infusion.

house bill 5006

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/mileg.asp?page=getobject&objname=2003-hb-5006

hb 5006 as introduced:

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2003-2004/billengrossed/house/htm/2003-hebh-5006.htm

a health care provider may object as a matter

of conscience to providing or participating in a health care service on ethical, moral, or religious grounds.

(2) a health care provider shall notify his or her employer

in writing of a conscientious objection described in subsection

[color=#0100ff]house bill no. 5006 (h-3) as amended april 21, 2004

[color=#0100ff]

1 (1). the written notice shall be given directly to his or her supervisor and shall include a statement explaining his or her conscientious objection and the health care service or services to which he or she specifically objects to providing or participating in under this act.

a health care provider may assert his or herconscientious objection under any of the following conditions:

(a) upon being offered employment.

(b) at the time the health care provider adopts [color=#0100ff][[color=#0100ff]an] ethical, moral, or religious belief system that conflicts with participation in a health care service.

© within 24 hours after he or she is asked or has received notice that he or she is scheduled to participate in a health care service to which he or she conscientiously objects.

michigan senate bill 972

http://www.consciencelaws.org/proposed-conscience-laws/usa/plusa04b.html

legislative session ended for 2004 with both house and senate bills referred to health committees. bill will need to be reintroduced for 2005-2006 session if still going forward.

seems aim of this bill is to allow an employee right to conscientious object to participate in healthcare activities without fear of reprisal.

legislation introduced all the time that may or may not be good policy. that's why legislative hearings are held, citizens have chance to write to legislators for/against legislation and debate held prior to vote.

that's the purpose of this forum: to empower healthcare professionals to know what's happening within their state and nationally regarding healthcare legislation; learn how to influence legislation so it's impowering and not destructive and try to have legislation enacted that serves the best interest of professionals and protects consumers/patients.

-----------------------------------------

michigan house backs conscience rights for health-care workers

by the associated press

04.22.04

http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/news.aspx?id=13224

noli irritare leones: conscientious objector policy act

http://www.miplannedparenthood.org/topics-advocates/legislation-adv.htm

university choice coalition - conscientious objector policy act

Reading it over, it appears that the bill is targeted at providing protection for health care providers who wish, on moral or religious grounds, from participating in certain health care procedures. To an extent, I guess I can agree with the idea in principle. For example, though I am against passing blanket laws prohibiting abortion, my own personal beliefs would mitigate against my participation in the procedure.

However, I question the need for such a law. We have had this type of conversation before. Most of us recognize that we have a right not to participate in the procedure itself. The solution to the problem is simple. For physicians, they simply do not have to offer the procedure. For nurses, we simply need not seek employment at facilities or in units that provide the procedure we find objectionable. At the same time, I have found on this board, at least, a universal agreement that we would have no right to refuse to provide care to a person who has had the procedure. So, while I might have the right not to participate in an abortion as a CRNA, I do not see my right extending to not providing anesthesia care to a patient who has had an abortion with complications and therefore now needs surgery.

What troubles me the most about this law is not that it provides protection for health care workers with moral objections to procedures, it provides the same protections to workers who object to lifestyles, and it goes far beyond the question of the "gay lifestyle." Were I racist, I could claim moral objections to interracial marriage, and refuse to treat patients in such marriages, and be protected by this bill.

This is another symptom of the undue sway and influence the ultra-right religious members of our society have gained to our government. I'm pretty conservative (surprise) and find this bill to be heinous on every level. I wonder, would I be able to apply for employment at a clinic that provided abortions, then after hiring tell them of my moral objections? Could I then force the clinic to continue to pay me to work there, even though I could not perform the duties for which I was hired? I don't see any protection in the bill that would prevent such an eventuality.

Kevin McHugh

How about refusing to care for a PARTICULAR doctor's patients altogether because you don't agree with the doctor's religious practices or HIS lifestyle, or his WHATEVER.

If we're going to discriminate let's give that right to everyone else.

Personally, I would not put myself in a situation where I would actively assist an abortion, but I would not refuse to care for a woman who became ill afterwards.

It would be my conscience I would have to deal with if I refused, but she also has to live with something on her conscience.

Jesus turned away no one.

WOW...What a can of worms.

Specializes in Hemodialysis, Home Health.

I'm speechless. :uhoh3:

I was under the impression that healthcare providers already have the right to refuse to participate in certain procedures on moral grounds... why is this "bill" now so neccessary? How is this new or different? Why do they think they need to introduce some type of "bill" ? Do they not have FAR more pressing issues to deal with?

This is beyond absurd.

This viewpoint goes against the very fiber of MY religious/spritual belief system.

Ergo.. have I the option then to refuse treatment to those who hold this view, or wish to enact this legislation?

Is this crazy, or what?

We've always had the right to refuse SOME things.. so just what are they really trying to do here? :uhoh21: Scary indeed.

+ Add a Comment