|
|
Religious Doctrine Can't Trump Patients' Lives and HealthA Catholic-owned hospital in Arizona recently made national headlines for demoting a nun for approving an abortion for a pregnant mother of four to save her life. While most of us would like to think this was an isolated incident, based on the Catholic Church's response and other reports, it wasn't and it won't be. Today the ACLU asked the federal government to investigate and take action against these hospitals. Denying such care is not only unethical, it also violates federal law. Our government should ensure that emergency rooms that open their doors to the public provide all necessary emergency care, including abortion. No hospital, religiously affiliated or otherwise, has a right to impose its beliefs to deny anyone necessary emergency medical care. The details of the Arizona story are deeply troubling. St. Joseph's Hospital and Medical Center, a Catholic-owned hospital in Phoenix, Arizona, provided a life-saving abortion to a young mother of four. After the incident was reported in the media, my colleague, Alexa Kolbi-Molinas, blogged about the issue here. A young woman was 11 weeks pregnant and dying from pulmonary hypertension. The hospital's Ethics Committee determined that if the woman wanted to terminate the pregnancy to save her life, her physicians would be permitted to do so under the Ethical and Religious Directives under which Catholic hospitals operate. The woman decided to terminate the pregnancy, and an abortion was performed. Sister Margaret Mary McBride was the liaison between the Ethics Committee and the physicians who were treating the pregnant woman. Sister McBride, a nurse with more than 30 years experience in health care administration, was demoted because of her role in facilitating the abortion. The Roman Catholic Diocese of Phoenix, which oversees St. Joseph's, denounced the abortion and issued a statement explaining that abortion is never allowed in Catholic health facilities, even to save the life of the woman. The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops also indicated that Sister McBride was properly punished for her role in the abortion when it issued a statement clarifying that an abortion like the one performed at St. Joseph's was inconsistent with the Ethical and Religious Directives. Although St. Joseph's provided the life-saving care that the patient needed, Sister McBride's subsequent treatment and the diocese's and the Catholic Bishops' unambiguous statements send the message to hospital employees, at St. Joseph's and at other Catholic hospitals around the country, that they risk punishment if they provide life-saving pregnancy terminations in the future. We all know that, unfortunately, a pregnant woman can suffer complications that require emergency attention to save her health or her life, and the care she receives should not be limited based on which emergency room she was admitted to. Catholic hospitals operate 15 percent of the hospital beds in the country, and are often the only hospital in a particular community, and therefore the only place where a woman can obtain care. As a result, many pregnant women who seek emergency reproductive health care in Catholic hospitals do not share the religious beliefs of the hospital, and may not receive appropriate medical care. Moreover, doctors and other hospital personnel should not risk losing their jobs to treat these women. We know that what happened at St. Joseph's was not an isolated incident. Catholic-owned hospitals across the country have refused to provide emergency abortions, as documented in a recent article in the American Journal of Public Health. For example, a doctor in the Northeast decided to leave a Catholic-owned hospital after he was forced by the hospital's ethics committee to risk a pregnant patient's life. The woman was in the process of miscarrying at 19 weeks of pregnancy. She was dying: her temperature was 106 degrees, she had disseminated intravascular coagulopathy, which is a life-threatening condition that prevents a person's blood from clotting normally and causes excessive bleeding. This patient was bleeding so badly that the sclera, the whites of her eyes, were red, filled with blood. Despite the fact that there was no chance the fetus could survive, the ethics committee told the doctor that he could not perform the abortion the woman needed to save her life until the fetus's heartbeat stopped. After the delay, the patient was in the Intensive Care Unit for 10 days, and developed pulmonary disease, resulting in lifetime oxygen dependency. The proper, compassionate course of action is to provide these women with appropriate emergency care. Hospitals are also obligated under federal law to do so. We hope that our government will enforce these laws to ensure that women and their families can enter any hospital emergency room and be assured that they will receive the proper care to protect their health and their lives. (Cross-posted to RH Reality Check and Feministing.) Tags: Religious Refusals, rf_rr
We intend the comments portion of this blog to be a forum where you can freely express your views on blog postings and on comments made by other people. Given that, please understand that you are responsible for the material you post on the comments portion of this blog. The only postings that we ask that you refrain from posting and that we cannot permit on our website are requests for legal assistance and postings that could cause ACLU to incur legal liability.
One important law in that regard is the prohibition on politically partisan activity. Given our nonprofit status, we may not endorse or oppose candidates for elective office. That means we cannot host comments on our site that show a preference for one candidate or party. Although we in no way wish to discourage you from that activity elsewhere, we ask that you not engage in that activity on our website (or include links to other websites that do so). Additionally, given that we are subject to very specific rules concerning the collection of personally identifying information through our website (names, email addresses, home address, financial information, etc.), we ask that you not use the comments portion of this blog to solicit this information from users of our website. We also ask that you not use the comments portion for advertising or requests for legal assistance, and do not add to your comment links to other websites, as we cannot be responsible for the content on other websites. We are not able to respond to unsolicited inquiries, complaints or requests for assistance sent to this blog. Please direct your complaint or request for assistance to the ACLU affiliate in your state. Requests for legal assistance left in the blog comments will not receive a response or be published. Finally, the ACLU cannot guarantee the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information in the comment section and expressly disclaims any liability for any information in this section. 11 Responses to "Religious Doctrine Can't Trump Patients' Lives and Health" |
|
|
© ACLU, 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor New York, NY 10004 |
Jul 2nd, 2010 at 10:04am
ACLU a/k/a Anti-Christian Legal Union!!
Jul 3rd, 2010 at 6:47pm
"Denying such care is not only unethical, it also violates federal law"
What federal law requires someone to perform an abortion?
Jul 4th, 2010 at 3:21pm
"Denying such care is not only unethical, it also violates federal law"
What law is that?
Jul 13th, 2010 at 4:11pm
Hi Airmail56. The federal laws it violates, as our letter states, are the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) 42 U.S.C. § 1395dd, and the Conditions of Participation of Medicare and Medicaid (COP), 42 C.F.R. § 482.13.
Jul 6th, 2010 at 5:20pm
This is why I did not have my baby in a Catholic hospital.
Jul 6th, 2010 at 5:54pm
Stupid Catholics.
Jul 6th, 2010 at 7:51pm
Thank God for the ACLU, which defends us all from sectarian nonsense like this.
Jul 7th, 2010 at 4:43pm
The last paragraph beautifully encapsulates the only acceptable course of action. Thank you!
Jul 28th, 2010 at 3:32am
That child should have been murdered!
That's basically what you're saying.
Aug 6th, 2010 at 1:16pm
Anon #9. there is no child at 11 weeks. Instead the life of a living, breathing person was saved, who, with her fetus, would otherwise have died. It that the result you would have preferred?
Nov 4th, 2010 at 10:52am
that woman knew that she was in a Catholic hospital and knew that she would have to go by their rules and er.5 be quiet you racist