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

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

I don't think it is about refusing a gay person the right to medical treatment but is about for example a catholic refusing to participate in an abortion. They are just giving people who have religious beliefs the right to refuse to participate in something that goes against their religious beliefs. We have all seen this argument before...

There is a difference in not treating someone because of your beliefs and not treating someone because of their beliefs.

For example-A devout Christian may refuse to assist with or perform abortions(this isn't new-Providence won't do hysterectomies!), but it is not okay to say you won't treat anyone who believes in abortion.

See the difference? What comes next-seperate hospitals for gays and straights? Can I visit my gay friend in the hospital? Or he me? Should we decide who we treat by race or sex? :angryfire

Specializes in ER (new), Respitory/Med Surg floor.
There is a difference in not treating someone because of your beliefs and not treating someone because of their beliefs.

For example-A devout Christian may refuse to assist with or perform abortions(this isn't new-Providence won't do hysterectomies!), but it is not okay to say you won't treat anyone who believes in abortion.

See the difference? What comes next-seperate hospitals for gays and straights? Can I visit my gay friend in the hospital? Or he me? Should we decide who we treat by race or sex? :angryfire

I totally agree.

Specializes in L & D; Postpartum.

Does this mean that I can refuse to care for teenaged mom because I don't think they should be having sex, for anybody who wears thong panties because I think they're disgusting, for fat people because they are fat because they choose to be. Oh, the list could go on and on. I could put myself out of a job really fast.

I am scared if this is the newest thing to come down the pike.

Specializes in ER, Tele, Cardiac Cath Lab.

O my whats next a jehovah witness nurse can refuse to give her patient a blood transfusion.

Specializes in ER (new), Respitory/Med Surg floor.
O my whats next a jehovah witness nurse can refuse to give her patient a blood transfusion.

OH BOY! Can you just imagine! Ikes!!!! :uhoh21:

Specializes in 5 yrs OR, ASU Pre-Op 2 yr. ER.
O my whats next a jehovah witness nurse can refuse to give her patient a blood transfusion.

They can, apparently.

Specializes in ER (new), Respitory/Med Surg floor.
They can, apparently.

You know what i think your right agh!

Specializes in Med-Surg, Trauma, Ortho, Neuro, Cardiac.
O my whats next a jehovah witness nurse can refuse to give her patient a blood transfusion.

I work with a JW nurse, and she declines to administer blood to her patients and we accept and that work with her on that. (I work med-surg, where blood products are not emergent).

It's the right thing to do.

Specializes in ER (new), Respitory/Med Surg floor.
I work with a JW nurse, and she declines to administer blood to her patients and we accept and that work with her on that. (I work med-surg, where blood products are not emergent).

It's the right thing to do.

I just find it hard since nursing deals with all different treatments. I had one pt who was upset because the one nurse just hung it and would not let her "bless the blood" because she felt it was part of another's soul going into her. Whatever you want! I let her witht he second unit i was just glad to get the blood in!

Yes because many christians, not all, feel gays are wrong so either way he's catering to that view point for votes before and now republican support. And if that statement is true trying to cater to people who support gays or feel nothing wrong with lifestyle but maybe disagree with just marriage. That's been his scheme. Same with the schiavo case he supported although he's backing out realizing that people are mixed about the situation. All politicians do this which is why gay marriage was a main issue in the campaign rather than what really counted which is revolting. :angryfire

Bush didn't know he was being recorded. It was done without his knowledge. So, he was speaking on a one to one basis about how he truly felt. He wasn't trying to make everyone happy.

And Marie, I don't think that Bush being against changing the definition of marriage is an act against Gays. The majority of our nation is against changing this definition. Bush is all for civil unions and gays having rights like others. He's just not going to go against his religious beliefs and change the definition of marriage. Civil unions have a long way to go since if a state has one, it's only recognized by that particular state. It doesn't transfer from state to state. As a side note, I'm all for gays being able to marry.

If you don't have the desire to help all people no matter what their orientation or race, then don't pursue the healthcare field.

agreed

This makes me so angry:angryfire and so sad:crying2:.

+ Add a Comment