Posted on 02/21/2015 6:59:22 PM PST by daniel1212
Two Michigan parents said that a local doctor recently refused to see their six-day-old child because they are lesbians, the Detroit Free Press reported Wednesday...
Jami and Krista Contreras said they made an appointment with pediatrician Vesna Roi at the advice of their midwife, according to television station WJBK. But when they brought their daughter for an appointment with the pediatrician, they said they were met by another doctor who told them that Roi would not treat a baby with two mothers, according to the Free Press.
Roi sent a letter of apology to the parents, later acquired by the Free Press, in which she explained: "After much prayer following your prenatal, I felt that I would not be able to develop the personal patient-doctor relationship that I normally do with my patients." She added, "Please know that I believe God gives us free choice and I would never judge anyone based on what they do with that free choice."
Although the incident happened in late 2014, the couple only recently decided to speak about it, according to the Free Press.
I think your "deeper right" is frankly a bunch of malarkey.
It might not have been what you would have done but that does not mean it was not right.
The kind of jobs you do are not on the level of the practice of medicine. They just aren’t.
Never said they were honey child.
But my right to choose do or not to do business is the same as any other human. Being a doctor changes nothing.
The exception is in a case of life or death. And once again being or not being a doctor changes nothing.
Could very well be.
I read that the Doctor had a disagreement with the parents so she referred the care to another physician in the clinic and there was no delay in the care.
Funny how you talk down at me instead of looking up at God. You argument boils down that you are determined to be your little potty self. Very tautological.
Your approach proves my point better than I could myself... thank you.
Only in God is there absolute rightness.
The noob ain’t a wedding cake.
Agreed.
doesn’t pass the smell test. Docs treat all sorts of kids with immoral parents.(drugs, not married, incompetent, don’t pay their bills) and this is especially true for pediatricians.
However, note that part about the “midwife”?
This is the clue. I suspect it wasn’t a fully trained midwife, but a self trained granny midwife.
A lot of times, if the kid is sick after such a delivery, and they bring the kid to you, if something goes wrong, they blame the doc for the infection, hemorrhage because the kid wasn’t given vitamin K, or gonorrhea of the eyes that weren’t treated with routine antibiotic drops (or mom screened for STD’s). You end up with a lawsuit and a lot of bad publicity when the kid’s illness (or death) was the midwife’s problem.
I used to work in an area where self trained “midwives” did deliveries at home. I would gladly treat those delivered by one midwife, who was competent and experienced with complications..., but after recognizing a second midwife was incompetent (and dirty) I worried about treating babies she delivered...She later killed a baby who didn’t breathe right away by doing cpr with so much force she lacerated the kid’s liver.
i agree with you 100%. On the other hand i do believe a service provider should have the ability to say no. It’s a private enterprise. In my opinion denying care to the infant was callous and perhaps stupid. It’s definitely not Christian to cast the sins of the parent upon the child.
Sure e do!
Just no BALLS!
Wow!
Exactly, but the couple and MSM react as if the doc left the kid with no care.
You sound just like the libs in your own state. Where did the doc leave the child without care? And which required a close relationship with the parents, thus leaving them with one who could, rather than abandoning the kid as you and the MSM infer? Why do you do this?
With a conscience.
Isn't that what she did by refusing to treat their kid?
Which should be your right, as in hiring. But people look as this case if the doc left the child without urgent medical care, which would be wrong, rather than it being more like a family counselor who chooses not to work with a family due to their defense of immoral life choices.
Superb post Steve_Seattle. And if all the critics wanted what was best for the child then they would condemn adoption by homosexuals.
I did a search last night on whether the koran permits or supports homosexual marriage
I suggest everyone do so
interesting
so? that is not what happened here.
not even remotely close to what happened
I ain’t treatin no lesbian babies.
Indeed, but the person who declines from fostering homosexuals raising children must be demonized, as if they left them dying on the floor! In reality, even the minister who refuses to perform same sex weddings is thrown under the bus by angry sodomites whose demons demand all salute the flag of Sodom, and thus give the devil glory, who reigns in his alternative universe so to speak.
It is not those who drink raw milk (I am not for it, but it is illegal) who are responsible for 79% of new HIV cases, but sodomites, while 41% of people who are transgender or gender-nonconforming have attempted suicide sometime in their lives, almost nine times the national average, and nearly three-quarters of adult lesbians overweight or obese. ( http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/risk/gender/msm/facts/index.html; http://www.thetaskforce.org/reports_and_research/ntds; http://cnsnews.com/news/article/feds-spend-15-million-study-why-lesbians-are-fat)
On the other hand, for a Christian to refuse to help a homosexual in amoral areas, from changing a flat tire (if he can) to seeking the salvation of his soul, is a sin.
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.