Posted on 02/21/2015 6:59:22 PM PST by daniel1212
A) This is a HOAX
B) It’s not “their” baby. They stole it from its legitimate parents.
If the story has the facts, then the doctor acted unethically. The office agreed to provide services to the infant, then reneged when he showed up. Seems pretty clear cut.
I’ve just seen too many of these story tweaks out of lesbians to believe it without hearing the other side of the story.
But which requires a close relationship with the parents, which in this case would not be feasible, nor that of a Jewish pediatrician with Nazi loving parents.
This was not a refusal to provide emergency care, or services at all, but only with a different doctor.
What the pediatrician should have done was have a heart to heart talk with the adoption parents, explaining her desire for the best for the child, but how that there would be conflict due to her objection to how the child would be raised. And that thus she was transferring them to a different pediatrician.
And which she should have the freedom to do, but not to deny needed care if there was not one else to provide it.
This
Does any business serving the public have standing to refuse to provide a service or product?
Sounds to me like he doesn't want to violate his oath:
I swear by Apollo the physician, and Aesculapius the surgeon, likewise Hygeia and Panacea, and call all the gods and goddesses to witness, that I will observe and keep this underwritten oath, to the utmost of my power and judgment.Unless someone wants to try to assert that the relationship with the parents is of no concern to the doctor.
I will reverence my master who taught me the art. Equally with my parents, will I allow him things necessary for his support, and will consider his sons as brothers. I will teach them my art without reward or agreement; and I will impart all my acquirement, instructions, and whatever I know, to my master's children, as to my own; and likewise to all my pupils, who shall bind and tie themselves by a professional oath, but to none else.
With regard to healing the sick, I will devise and order for them the best diet, according to my judgment and means; and I will take care that they suffer no hurt or damage.
Nor shall any man's entreaty prevail upon me to administer poison to anyone; neither will I counsel any man to do so. Moreover, I will give no sort of medicine to any pregnant woman, with a view to destroy the child.
Further, I will comport myself and use my knowledge in a godly manner.
I will not cut for the stone, but will commit that affair entirely to the surgeons.
Whatsoever house I may enter, my visit shall be for the convenience and advantage of the patient; and I will willingly refrain from doing any injury or wrong from falsehood, and (in an especial manner) from acts of an amorous nature, whatever may be the rank of those who it may be my duty to cure, whether mistress or servant, bond or free.
Whatever, in the course of my practice, I may see or hear (even when not invited), whatever I may happen to obtain knowledge of, if it be not proper to repeat it, I will keep sacred and secret within my own breast.
If I faithfully observe this oath, may I thrive and prosper in my fortune and profession, and live in the estimation of posterity; or on breach thereof, may the reverse be my fate!
The devil is in the details.
Maybe it was best, maybe it wasn’t. I’d hate to say that any advice about physical care must need correspond to a wink and nod about the spiritual and emotional problems associated with a “gay” household — and if statistics bear out, it’s likely they will split up anyhow leaving the child with a single parent. Being there and being helpful could have helped.
There are often several sides to a story.
Agree, but what if the doctor agrees to provide care to an infant, then refuses when she shows up at the office?
Actually Michigan recently passed a law protecting business owners in cases like this. We have yet to see how effective it is.
In any case. I want to hear what the doctor has to say.
Then you have little experience with conflict of conscience, or sympathy for it. Those that do would be respected physicians in my book, not those who do not.
And the lesbians were not at all left without care, only not by the pediatrician they first chose. And would they really want a born again conservative Christian as their pediatrician, or be so disrespectful to her convictions that they play the victim card?
Maybe they can find a Muslim doctor who will treat her and them
Then again, maybe not
as long as the rats control the judgeships this kind of tyranny will continue...
Since, statistically, children are more likely to be sexually abused when raised by homosexual parents, a physician who is not blinded by the LBGT propaganda would have been in an excellent position to watch for evidence of abuse as the child grew older.
They were seen by another doctor. Same office. Service was provided.
We can discuss the fall of dominos, but who pushed the dominos?
And so what’s the picture here... the poop pummeled the propeller when the doctor who begged out, said why?
Yes, there is more to the story. I had found it on Detroit Free press but FR cannot post from their. I wish i had found this source:
Last September when the expectant mothers first met Dr. Vesna Roi at Eastlake Pediatrics in Roseville. She was recommended by their midwife.
“We were really happy with her,” Krista said. “The kind of care she offered, we liked her personality, she seemed pretty friendly. She seemed pretty straight up with us.”
The Contrerasas were told to make an appointment with Roi once Bay arrived. The baby was born at home and when she was six days old - they went in.
But instead of seeing Dr. Roi, another doctor greeted them.
“The first thing Dr. Karam said was ‘I’ll be your doctor, I’ll be seeing you today because Dr. Roi decided this morning that she prayed on it and she won’t be able to care for Bay,” Jami said.
“Dr. Karam told us she didn’t even come to the office that morning because she didn’t want to see us.”
The new mothers were shocked, hurt and angry.
“It was embarrassing, it was humiliating and here we are, new parents trying to protect her,” Jami said. “And we know this happens in the world and we’re completely prepared for this to happen other places. But not at our six-day-old’s wellness appointment.”
Bay’s parents proceeded with the appointment with the other doctor then found another pediatric group for their baby.
“When we started calling other pediatricians my first thing on the phone was, we’re lesbian moms - is this okay with you,” Krista said.
Still upset, the new moms shared their story on social media. People started calling Eastlake Pediatrics to share their alarm. On Feb. 9, nearly four months after the appointment - the Contreras family finally received this letter from Roi.
The letter read:
“After much prayer following your prenatal, I felt that i would not be able to develop the personal patient-doctor relationships that I normally do with my patients.”
“We do not keep prenatal information once we have our meetings so I had no way to contact you.”
She apologizes, saying, “I should have spoken with you directly that day,” and “please know that I believe that God gives us free choice and I would never judge anyone based on what they do with that free choice.”
FOX 2 contacted Roi who said that she could not comment, citing patient privacy laws.
As it turns out, Roi has free choice too - the American Medical Association says physicians cannot refuse to care for patients based on sexual orientation, but doctors can refuse treatment if it’s incompatible with their personal, religious or moral beliefs.
And here in Michigan - there are no laws that protect lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender families from discrimination.- http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/story/28142401/doctor-refuses-treatment-of-same-sex-couples-baby
Getting the news out is the first step of the upcoming lawsuit.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.