[neverdem]

This raises the question of what medical care may be refused under the cover of concience. Abortion seems the main one discussed; perhaps birth control pills; maybe blood transfusions. Could a doctor refuse to prescribe a particular drug because she considers the drug company to be sleazy? How about denying care to illegal aliens, smokers, drunks, drug addicts, soccer fans? (That's a bit different, one isn't denying care under because the care is problematical but because the patient is.)

I believe that when you compel healthcare providers, especially physicians who took some version of the Hippocratic Oath, from which the clause, "First, do no harm", has been distilled from the Latin, "Primum non nocere", to act against their conscience is the essence of tyranny.

Compelling actions by healthcare providers which is against their conscience is different from discriminating which patient is worthy of treatment.

I remember reading a story in the British Medical Journal about a smoker who needed coronary artery bypass surgery whose surgery was delayed because the patient still smoked. After the patient managed to quit, the patient died shortly before the scheduled surgery.

Personally, I believe in free will, and that we are all sinners.

[hocndoc]

"Personally, I believe in free will, and that we are all sinners."


And so does Alta Charo, or she wouldn't constantly be trying to change things. She just doesn't recognize her own bias - or the natural source.