|
Wolf1020 -> RE: 60 Minutes Report on Plan B (11/28/2005 1:24:01 PM)
|
quote:
Wolf, i appreciate what You have said but respectfully disagree with You on a few points. There is no medical, social, or scientific reason to require Plan B be scripted rather than over the counter. It is a safe drug. No one disputes that. i feel Plan B is comparable to condoms.
All drugs have possible side effects. The worst side effect you will get from a condom is a rash if you have a latex allergies. But all drugs are billed as safe, that doesn't mean they are sold over the counter. Heavy pain med's aren't sold OTC, even one's that aren't narcotics. Just as safe as Tylenol, but aren't sold OTC for whatever reason, I think that plan B falls similarly.
quote:
As for someone's beliefs regarding birth control, some people follow the Church's teachings on the subject, and i do not think they should be ridiculed. However, i do understand Your reaction to the notion of foregoing birth control....to me also it seems ridiculous. As i have said in other posts, being Catholic is not for weenies.
I agree I don't think they should be ridiculed. But a private business or organization has as much right to not offer or carry something as a person has to want it. They are a private business and have the right to not carry a medication that they feel terminates life just like they have the right to not do an actual abortion.
quote:
Patient dumping, however, is a serious problem and the regulatory bodies and government agencies will punish severely if a hospital does this. i know of no other circumstances in which a patient may be transported to another facility at the hospital's request
But it wouldn't be at the hospitals request. It would be at the patients since it is she who would want to be transferred. Look at it this way. If a patient wish's to have an abortion outside of her life being in danger a hospital does not have to do it and she will have to be transferred. I think a hospital should have the same medication discretion as they do for procedures. As you say above that quote a hospital can transfer an uninsured patient. This is true. The hospital is required to provide emergency medicine and procedures to stabilize a patient. Once the patients condition is stabilized and s/he is able to survive the trip they are taken to another hospital for further care. This includes anything not needed to save a patients life or that would put them in undue suffering (such as with holding any pain medication so they can make the trip) plan B is not needed to save a persons life and is not needed to ease a persons suffering like pain medication.
Chaingang-
I stated that as a personal belief. What you stated? Well frankly that was one of the most bigoted ignorant disrespectful posts to a group of people I have ever seen.
Merc-
I am sorry to hear that. I think that in cases like that (unless it was needed immediatly to save your life) I think they should have had to provide a transfer to a hospital that would have been willing to do it or, like they eventually did, agree to do the procedure as a special circumstance. Perhaps a certian ammendment to my thinking would be that if no hospitals withen a certian radius (say for the sake of argument 50 miles) willing to do it either they would wave their right to deny precedure that indirectly results in violation of one of their views. So such things as removal of a tube (unless her life was in iminant danger in which case they should have to do it reguardless) they would have to do if no other hospitals around are willing to do it either. None nescisary procedures that directly violate their beliefs, such as an actual abortions, would not count to this though unless it was a matter of the mothers health. In short if no other hospitals will do it and it isn't a direct violation or it is needed as an emergency they will have to grunt ant bare it, though procedures which are elective that directly go agianst their beliefs would not count to this ammendment.
|
|
|
|
