Restore the Balance(Originally posted on Daily Kos.) When the Bush administration pushed through the Health Care Denial Rule, its parting shot against women's health, we told you we were preparing our next move. Today, we made good on our promise to restore access to reproductive health care when we filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging the rule. As we've reported before, the Bush rule sounds alarm bells, sirens really. Our complaint, filed on behalf of the National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association (NFPRHA), outlines our core concerns. Broadly speaking, the rule significantly undermines the ability of millions of women — especially low-income and uninsured women — to access essential reproductive and other health care services. It expressly permits a broad range of health care workers and facilities to refuse to provide care, information, and counseling, potentially even in emergency situations. At the same time, it fails to require refusing providers to either notify their employers or their patients of their objections to providing care. For people seeking health services the rule could mean:
The rule also threatens the ability of states to enforce their own laws aimed at protecting access to reproductive health care. These include laws
For years, the law has carefully balanced protections for individual religious liberty and patients' access to reproductive health care. The Bush rule takes patients' health needs out of the equation. We're asking the court to restore this important balance. We are proud to be joined in this effort to protect access to reproductive health care by numerous states and women's health organizations. In addition to our legal challenge brought on behalf of NFPRHA, two other lawsuits were filed today in the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut: the state of Connecticut filed a challenge along with California, Illinois, New Jersey, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts; and Planned Parenthood Federation of America with Planned Parenthood of Connecticut filed its own legal challenge to the Bush rule.
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. 3 Responses to "Restore the Balance" |
|
© ACLU, 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor New York, NY 10004 |
Jan 15th, 2009 at 9:15pm
It's unbelievable that the "American Civil Liberties Union" opposes a ruling that simply clarifies current law that protects the right of men and women to refuse to act in violation of their consciences.
Yeah, sure, "Trust me, I don't have a conscience!"
Certainly, each of you could imagine a situation in which a patient or patient's surrogate demands medicine or a procedure that is inappropriate. But more: imagine a time when the State demands that doctors take turns (legally) killing prisoners on death row or aiding in torturing political prisoners.
Jan 18th, 2009 at 12:14am
Dr. Nuckols:
Remind me to never ever go to you if I need health care. How dare you! I don't give a damn if you 'have a conscience' or not. If I need health care - and you are a doctor/nurse/pharmacist, I expect you to provide the care that I need and/or request. If you have a problem with that - get into another profession that doesn't interfere with your 'conscience'.
And I am really surprised that you are in ethics. What this law does is give ANY employee in a health care facility the right to deny needed care to anyone without telling them why or giving them the option of seeking care from another provider. And you think this is ethical somehow? Since both of your imaginary scenarios are not reality - you can get lost!
I don't want you or anyone else making health care decisions for me on the basis of your religion. You are forcing your religious beliefs on my - without my consent - and even more aggregious - without my knowledge.
Jan 22nd, 2009 at 12:01am
lokywoky,
You are as stupid as hell, you not need "contraceptive materials", and if you for some reason do, there is no longer any point in living and you should be euthanized immediately. By the way, you should probably think out your posts before you write them down, because Doctor Nuckols faces the reciprocal of your dilemma (having Doctor Nuckols’s impose his religious beliefs upon you, by not “treating” you). In other words, by requesting Doctor Nuckols to perform service that he finds is against his moral beliefs, you are in essence forcing your own beliefs upon him. P.S. Watch your spelling.