HHS Secretary Addresses Abortion Groups' Lies, Seeks to Protect Pro-Life Doctors and Patients
Concerned Women for America
Human Trafficking Caucus Briefing
NEW! June 21 & 22 - Young Women for America Conference - Jefferson City
The Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) is stepping in to correct misleading reports from abortion groups and the media. Proposed regulations to protect the right of health care providers not to participate in abortion, physician-assisted suicide, or other immoral acts, have been miscast as denying women access to contraception.
A blog entry from Sec. Mike Leavitt explains the proposed regulations. Yet blog comments from abortion enthusiasts reveal a startling lack of understanding of "contraception" and a dangerous demand that medical professionals violate their Hippocratic Oath to "do no harm." They insist on a woman's right to get whatever she demands from health care providers, but also insist that professionals have no right to exercise sound medical judgments and must participate in acts that can result in harm to their patients.
You can support pro-life doctors by sending a comment to Sec. Leavitt at
http://secretarysblog.hhs.gov/my_weblog/2008/08/physician-con-1.html
For over 35 years, federal laws have stated that, in programs funded by HHS, health care providers cannot be discriminated against for refusing to participate in abortions or other immoral acts that can harm patients. Yet medical students, doctors, nurses and pharmacists report being forced out of jobs, or not hired because of their pro-life convictions.
Substantiating the reports of pro-life doctors being pressured to do abortions, recently the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) released "ethics" guidelines on the "Limits on the Right of Conscience" that would require OB/GYNs to perform and refer for abortions. Not long after that, the American Board of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ABOG) released new guidelines requiring doctors to comply with all of ACOG's ethics guidelines. ABOG provides credentials for doctors, which are necessary for them to practice in hospitals.
Sec. Leavitt sent letters to the organizations pointing out that this could violate federal laws that protect the right of health care professionals not to participate in acts that violate their conscience.
The groups' response, according to Sec. Leavitt, was "dodgy and unsatisfying." So he asked for regulations to be drafted to enforce the existing laws and protect the legal right of patients to choose a doctor who reflects his or her beliefs.
The proposed regulations explain the right of health care workers to follow their consciences on issues like abortion, which the professionals may define (a definition backed by medical textbooks) as "terminating a human life before or after implantation."
Someone within HHS leaked the proposed regulations to The New York Times, claiming that the regulations "redefined" abortion to include contraception. In fact, the regulations focus on the right of health care providers to follow their consciences and make the reasoned medical judgment that abortion is an action that "terminates a human life before or after implantation."
Medical textbooks define conception of an embryo as occurring before implantation of the embryo in the mother's womb.
Abortion advocates, however, call this limiting access to "contraception." They define "contraception" (against conception) as including drugs or devices that operate after conception occurs and before implantation.
If they are successful in either coercing doctors into participating in abortions or pushing pro-life professionals out of jobs there will be fewer health care workers in an already diminishing field. Patients - especially pro-life women - would be denied access to health care professionals who provide the care they need.
Many women could not trust an abortionist for their prenatal care. They would not be assured that a doctor, who moments before in another room had killed another woman's baby, could walk into their check-up and provide the best care for their unborn child.
Plenty of health care workers, and billions of dollars from government and insurance companies, accommodate pro-choice women. Pro-life women, on the other hand, can have a difficult time finding health care providers who respect and live out pro-life convictions.
Abortion advocates are causing a ruckus about a rule that simply requires health agencies to follow the law by not discriminating against people who object to participating in unethical actions such as abortion, assisted suicide, or other actions contrary to Biblical or ethical convictions. Unless we counter the distorted claims of abortion advocates about the new regulations, those regulations could be blocked. If health care professionals are denied the right to live out moral beliefs, patients will suffer the consequences.
Action: Don't let abortion advocates force pro-life doctors out of their jobs. Support the regulations and laws that protect the right of conscience by sending a comment to HHS. If you know a health care provider who has been discriminated against for pro-life views, your stories are especially needed.
Read Sec. Leavitt's blog and send a comment: http://secretarysblog.hhs.gov/my_weblog/2008/08/physician-con-1.html
Paying the Price and Paving the Way.
Nurse fired for speaking out against hospital's abortion policies
News report: "Jill Stanek, an outspoken nurse who spoke out against the abortions performed at Christ Hospital in Oak Lawn where she worked, was fired Friday. Stanek reported to work at the hospital Friday night, her first day back after a two-week vacation. When she arrived, her manager and the human resources department head told her she no longer had a job, Stanek said."
Jill Stanek: "Regarding my termination, after having spoken with my attorneys I can say at this point that my firing was solely related to my speaking out against Christ Hospital's abortion policies. It was a wrongful termination."
Resident physician fired for teaching on abortion complications
(Anonymity requested): "I have been discriminated against during my Ob/Gyn residency. I gave a grand rounds (case presentation) on abortion complications and was fired for it. It was in San Diego, and I was a chief resident in Ob/Gyn at Mercy Hospital. I gave the talk at the Grand Rounds at the UCSD hospital. I was fired for "creating morale problems and insubordination."
That was in 1980, but it is still happening. I was suspended by Kaiser in the 1980s twice for assisting teen clients who were being forced by their families to undergo abortions. I have been discriminated in my career advancement. Being pro-life is not politically correct, Directorship of Departments, fellowships etc are out of the question."
Medical student denied medical school admission for Christian beliefs
Amy Gookin: "I was denied admission to a medical school due to my religious beliefs. I was told by my interview that I would be a bad doctor because of my Christianity and that I was biased. As a result, he gave me a bad review and placed me in a non-selectable category. My (current medical) school and its students discriminate against anything Christian. Muslim, Jewish, Eastern thought are all acceptable to some students, but Christianity is not. They won't let us announce prayer sessions on the bulletin or anything that mentions God, Jesus, and salvation, without hassle. We weren't even able to mention or have Christmas decorations or caroling without being hassled."
Anesthesiologist must anesthetize for abortion as employment condition
Frank Block, Jr., MD: "One place that I interviewed for a job told me in no uncertain terms that while they would try to keep me away from the abortions but that I would, in fact, have to provide anesthesia for abortions if I went there. (I didn't go there.) My whole career path has been focused upon finding places where I would have minimal hassles over my beliefs. I am happy to defend them, but I am not happy to have an ongoing issue over them."
Family medicine physician forced out over contraceptives for unmarried patients
Dr. Shelley Phillips, a family medicine physician practicing in San Antonio, Tex. under a not-for-profit university hospital group, University Health System reported in May 2008 that the corporation that runs her practice was insisting that she provide contraception in all cases. Dr. Phillips restricts contraception prescriptions to married patients. After several patients allegedly complained, her medical director informed Dr. Phillips that the hospital administration demanded that all the physicians in the clinic prescribe contraception for any and all reasons. Dr. Phillips resigned.
Medical student reluctant to pursue Ob-Gyn career due to abortion pressure
Trevor K. Kitchens: "I am a first year medical student in the beginning stages of deciding which specialty I would like to pursue. I am currently very interested in OB/GYN, but I am afraid of the relationship between this field and abortion. By the way, I am 100% against abortion, and there is no way I would perform one. Moreover, there is no way I would tell a patient that abortion is an option under any circumstance, because I do not believe it is an option. My concern is that I will start a residence and would subsequently be required at some point to give a patient the option of abortion, which I would refuse. My fear is that taking this stand would cost me my residence position.
"Now, if that is what it comes down to, I will be glad to take the stand for Jesus Christ and give up my position. However, I would really like to be able to avoid this situation and complete my residence so that I could go on and serve the Lord in that field. So I guess my question is, Can an institution take action against a resident for taking this type of a stand against abortion? And are there any institutions in particular that would be understanding of my beliefs and not ask me to compromise them?"
Ob-Gyn intern loses privileges for refusing to perform abortions
Sandy Christiansen, MD: "As an intern, the opportunity to get into the OR was a great privilege, as most of our time was spent in L&D or the clinic. I was the only intern who declined to perform elective abortions, and I made it clear that it was because of my Christian beliefs. One of my fellow interns was frequently given the privilege of scrubbing in on Gyn cases. I questioned my chief resident as to why I wasn't being given that opportunity and she replied that Susie was working hard doing the abortions and had earned this privilege whereas I had 'refused' to do this work and hence did not get the 'perk.'"
Ob-Gyn physician reamed out over refusal to perform abortion
Sandy Christiansen, MD: "I was the chief of the obstetrical service and was thus responsible for the care and management of all of the obstetrical patients on the clinic service. We had a patient, at the time, whose baby was diagnosed with Down's syndrome and the mother had decided to abort. Since she was so far along, she was to have labor induced and was to be managed on the obstetrical floor. I spoke with my attending physician and told her that I did not feel comfortable being involved with this patient's abortion because of my Christian beliefs and I had spoken with another resident who was willing to oversee this patient's care in my stead.
"The attending proceeded to reprimand me loudly in front of my team of residents, interns and medical students. She accused me of abandoning my patient, of shirking my responsibilities and being insensitive to my patient. Not once did she acknowledge that I had a legitimate reason to take such a stand. During private practice, I have not experienced such blatant examples of religious discrimination, but have certainly felt 'snubbed' or dismissed for my beliefs. In general, there has not been a collegiate atmosphere of mutual respect for differing stances."
*Articles and quotes courtesy of the Christian Medical Association.
1015 Fifteenth St. N.W., Suite 1100
Washington, D.C. 20005
Phone: (202) 488-7000
Fax: (202) 488-0806
E-mail: mail@cwfa.org