Raped woman refused emergency contraception by OK doctor

#26
#26
KoachKrab127 said:
So, you're using the argument "well, everybody does it!" to justify bad doctors? If doctors are not doing what is best for their patients they should be investigated.

No, I was responding to your argument that judges and lawyers have to be objective. Judges? Yes. Constitution guarantees it and we do not pay judges nor do we choose them. Lawyers like virtually every other business transaction (including health care) are a voluntary exchange between parties.

Now to the the "doing what's best for their patients". That is indeed a slippery slope. If the doctor has complete control then the patient surrenders all power to one side of the exchange. On the otherhand, if the patient can dictate what medical services are to be provided then the doctor cannot do what is best (in their opinion) since they must yield to the demands of the patient.

And did I say we can only see one doctor? Sure, she could see a different doctor, but their was a time issue in this instance. The longer you wait to take emergency contraception, the more likely pregnancy will occur. That could be a problem when a doctor is refusing treatment in a situation that is pressed for time.

Was there no other doctor in the hospital?

Like I said, if a doctor has a professional medical opinion as to why a certain treatment is not safe, I would listen. But this "personal beliefs" nonsense has to be stopped. They shouldn't be a doctor if they have personal beliefs against what a doctor does!
Click to expand...

What if the doctor's professional medical opinion is that the emergency contraception is not necessary?
 
#29
#29
KoachKrab127 said:
I'd want to hear documented facts as to why it is not.
Click to expand...

maybe he asked about her cycle and given the answer the chances of pregnancy were virtually nil.

maybe he figured that because he was a doctor he'd be forced to perform on demand abortions (being a doctor and all) so he thought he'd wait it out.
 
#30
#30
KoachKrab127 said:
If your pursuit of happiness effects other people's rights, that's a problem. You can argue "well, she could've seen a different doctor," but there's a time issue here. What if she ended up getting pregnant and then got an abortion? The doctor would be responsible for that abortion.

What if the governor forced everyone in the state to give away all their money to the homeless because "that's what Jesus would have done?"

If you don't let him do that, you're not allowing his pursuit of happiness!

See, that's a ridiculous argument, and the same goes for doctors. If you become a doctor, you have to provide treatment to patients. If you don't have the foresight to see that you might have to prescribe emergency contraception to somebody, then you're probably too stupid to be a doctor in the first place. (slight sarcasm on that last sentence)
Click to expand...

are you familiar with the Hippocratic Oath, particularly it's first line?

no harm has been done by refusing contraception or a rape kit.

also, according to the story you linked to in the OP,

“I will not give you emergency contraceptives because it goes against my beliefs,” the doctor allegedly told the rape victim and her mother, Rhonda. “She knew my daughter had just been raped. Her attitude was so judgmental and I felt that she was just judging my daughter,”
Click to expand...

did ThinkProgress not interview the first doctor?
 
#31
#31
volinbham said:
maybe he asked about her cycle and given the answer the chances of pregnancy were virtually nil.

maybe he figured that because he was a doctor he'd be forced to perform on demand abortions (being a doctor and all) so he thought he'd wait it out.
Click to expand...

Well, that would be a much more acceptable reason than "it's against my personal beliefs." I would listen to that reasoning (if I were a woman...)

As to your 2nd paragraph, I'm not sure I understand what you are saying. Are you saying that the doctor thinks it would be okay to skip the contraception and just perform an abortion a few weeks later if she happens to become pregnant?

I would assume that emergency contraception is much more safe and easy than performing an abortion, but I'm not a doctor, so not 100% sure.
 
#32
#32
It is interesting how hard one must search even to find the name of the hospital in any of these blogs. Anyway, Canadian Valley Hospital is a private healthcare facility originally managed and operated under Integris and has since merged with Baptist Healthcare of Oklahoma; thus, the hospital is a privately funded and managed religious establishment, a place where one would actually expect the members to place their beliefs above other interests.

Hey, if you do not like religious beliefs regarding abortion and contraception, do not go to a religious hospital after being raped.
 
#33
#33
#34
#34
therealUT said:
It is interesting how hard one must search even to find the name of the hospital in any of these blogs. Anyway, Canadian Valley Hospital is a private healthcare facility originally managed and operated under Integris and has since merged with Baptist Healthcare of Oklahoma; thus, the hospital is a privately funded and managed religious establishment, a place where one would actually expect the members to place their beliefs above other interests.

Hey, if you do not like religious beliefs regarding abortion and contraception, do not go to a religious hospital after being raped.
Click to expand...

Blame the victim, of course, that's the best solution.

If you've just been raped, do you honestly expect someone under severe emotional distress to think about that before walking into a hospital?
 
#35
#35
KoachKrab127 said:
Blame the victim, of course, that's the best solution.

If you've just been raped, do you honestly expect someone under severe emotional distress to think about that before walking into a hospital?
Click to expand...

she didn't seem to mind talking to ThinkProgress afterward
 
#36
#36
volinbham said:
I think he should have given it to her but the notion that your beliefs have to be completely put aside is nuts.

You are saying all doctors should be required to prescribe all legal drugs? What if a doctor doesn't think Ritalin is a good drug - should he/she be forced to prescribe it?
Click to expand...

Was there a valid medical reason why the doctor would be aprehensive about the emergency contraception? If not and it was based on personal belief then the ritalin example doesn't apply.

If the hospital standard medical procedure is to apply emergency contraception in cases of rape, and said doctor is against it based on personal beliefs, he should open his own hospital and work there.

Not enough facts IMO. But the bottom line is if the patient wanted the emergency contraception and the doctor cannot provide a medical reason why it would hurt her or isn't necessary, personal preference is not enough reason to not give it to her.

One would think the doctor would realize if she is afraid she is pregnant and is asking for it, she will get the abortion anyway, maybe when the pregnancy is further along (or she is actually pregnant). Nobody can give a clear cut medical or philosophical cutoff for where life begins, but generally if an abortion is going to take place then the earlier the better. If she wasn't pregnant, then it should be a no brainer to give her the contraception.
 
#37
#37
After thinking about it more, I've halfway flipped my position. I think that it would be absurd to force private hospitals to provide all forms of treatment.

However, I will say that a doctor who refuses to give contraception and judges a rape victim is a huge douche.

Maybe it's that doctor's right to refuse treatment, but it's also my right to call that doctor a douche.

I'll just leave it at that.
 
#38
#38
rjd970 said:
Was there a valid medical reason why the doctor would be aprehensive about the emergency contraception? If not and it was based on personal belief then the ritalin example doesn't apply.

If the hospital standard medical procedure is to apply emergency contraception in cases of rape, and said doctor is against it based on personal beliefs, he should open his own hospital and work there.

Not enough facts IMO. But the bottom line is if the patient wanted the emergency contraception and the doctor cannot provide a medical reason why it would hurt her or isn't necessary, personal preference is not enough reason to not give it to her.

One would think the doctor would realize if she is afraid she is pregnant and is asking for it, she will get the abortion anyway, maybe when the pregnancy is further along (or she is actually pregnant). Nobody can give a clear cut medical or philosophical cutoff for where life begins, but generally if an abortion is going to take place then the earlier the better. If she wasn't pregnant, then it should be a no brainer to give her the contraception.
Click to expand...

I agreed with everything you said. You stated my opinions much better than I could. :good!:
 
#39
#39
volinbham said:
What if the doctor's professional medical opinion is that the emergency contraception is not necessary?
Click to expand...

Then what's the problem with not giving it if it will cause no harm to the patient? What if the doctor is wrong about it not being necessary and she does become pregnant? Surely the doctor would realize she is going to get the abortion if she is pregnant.

Love the logic here. I'm not going to give treatment based on personal beliefs that would prevent a possible pregnancy, knowing that if you are pregnant it is all but certain an abortion will take place anyway.

If nothing else, you would think the doctor would give the treatment knowing this could be preventing what would be a legit abortion.
 
#40
#40
KoachKrab127 said:
After thinking about it more, I've halfway flipped my position. I think that it would be absurd to force private hospitals to provide all forms of treatment.

However, I will say that a doctor who refuses to give contraception and judges a rape victim is a huge douche.

Maybe it's that doctor's right to refuse treatment, but it's also my right to call that doctor a douche.

I'll just leave it at that.
Click to expand...

the doctor was a woman, btw
 
#42
#42
therealUT said:
It is interesting how hard one must search even to find the name of the hospital in any of these blogs. Anyway, Canadian Valley Hospital is a private healthcare facility originally managed and operated under Integris and has since merged with Baptist Healthcare of Oklahoma; thus, the hospital is a privately funded and managed religious establishment, a place where one would actually expect the members to place their beliefs above other interests.

Hey, if you do not like religious beliefs regarding abortion and contraception, do not go to a religious hospital after being raped.
Click to expand...

Agree with all of this, with the exception that the patient knowing a hospital named "Canadian Valley Hospital" is a religious based hospital that wouldn't provide a valid medical treatment to rape victims.
 
#45
#45
therealUT said:
There is a difference between providing treatment to save a life and providing treatment in order to grant comfort. There is an intrinsic duty in the former, and no duty in the latter. That is, a doctor ought to be able to tell someone who does not like the treatment that they can find another doctor.
Click to expand...

So if the doctor refused the contraception based on medical reasons for not believing the patient was pregnant and the "comfort" treatment was not needed...then what if he was wrong and the victim is pregnant? Now he has forced what could be an incredibly hard and emotional decision on the victim. I would classify that situation as causing harm to the victim. At that point it isn't about comfort, it is about helping the victim move on from the ordeal, not lengthen it longer. I don't know the law, but I wonder if a malpractice suit could be brought on at that point.
 
#46
#46
rjd970 said:
Was there a valid medical reason why the doctor would be aprehensive about the emergency contraception? If not and it was based on personal belief then the ritalin example doesn't apply.

If the hospital standard medical procedure is to apply emergency contraception in cases of rape, and said doctor is against it based on personal beliefs, he should open his own hospital and work there.

Not enough facts IMO. But the bottom line is if the patient wanted the emergency contraception and the doctor cannot provide a medical reason why it would hurt her or isn't necessary, personal preference is not enough reason to not give it to her.

One would think the doctor would realize if she is afraid she is pregnant and is asking for it, she will get the abortion anyway, maybe when the pregnancy is further along (or she is actually pregnant). Nobody can give a clear cut medical or philosophical cutoff for where life begins, but generally if an abortion is going to take place then the earlier the better. If she wasn't pregnant, then it should be a no brainer to give her the contraception.
Click to expand...

First, I would have given it.

Doc's typically contract with the hospital and are not employees. That said, if the hospital is okay with a doc having this particular objection then I see no reason to claim that all docs must administer emergency contraception upon demand of patients or start their own hospital.

The patient is not prevented from this treatment.

I really don't see the big deal. It is not a Hypocratic Oath violation so where is this notion of a a doctor's duty coming from?
 
#47
#47
KoachKrab127 said:
Maybe it's that doctor's right to refuse treatment, but it's also my right to call that doctor a douche.

I'll just leave it at that.
Click to expand...

It is certainly your right but that's a long way from saying that all doctors should be required to perform abortions (as you did in a post in this thread)
 
#48
#48
volinbham said:
First, I would have given it.

Doc's typically contract with the hospital and are not employees. That said, if the hospital is okay with a doc having this particular objection then I see no reason to claim that all docs must administer emergency contraception upon demand of patients or start their own hospital.

The patient is not prevented from this treatment.

I really don't see the big deal. It is not a Hypocratic Oath violation so where is this notion of a a doctor's duty coming from?
Click to expand...

If the doctor is wrong and a decision has to be made by the patient regarding getting an actual abortion, then it is a hypocratic oath issue.
 
#49
#49
rjd970 said:
Then what's the problem with not giving it if it will cause no harm to the patient? What if the doctor is wrong about it not being necessary and she does become pregnant? Surely the doctor would realize she is going to get the abortion if she is pregnant.

Love the logic here. I'm not going to give treatment based on personal beliefs that would prevent a possible pregnancy, knowing that if you are pregnant it is all but certain an abortion will take place anyway.

If nothing else, you would think the doctor would give the treatment knowing this could be preventing what would be a legit abortion.
Click to expand...

Do we all make "logic" decisions? It's fine to criticize the doctor's logic but suggesting they can't be a doctor if they don't do this is nuts.

Further, there is something to be said for having principals whether others agree with them or not. Logic is not infallible.
 
#50
#50
rjd970 said:
If the doctor is wrong and a decision has to be made by the patient regarding getting an actual abortion, then it is a hypocratic oath issue.
Click to expand...

Really? (BTW I misspelled it - Hippocratic not hypocratic)

I've read several versions just now and don't see how this doctor's refusal would be considered a violation.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top