Martha Coakley: Devout Catholics 'Probably shouldn't work in the emergency room'

Martha Coakley: Devout Catholics 'Probably shouldn't work in the emergency room' (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

FatDomDaddy -> Martha Coakley: Devout Catholics 'Probably shouldn't work in the emergency room' (1/16/2010 4:34:10 PM)
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/jan/10011502.html I wonder if she thinks non-smokers shouldn't work in bars and restaurants that allow smoking too... I am guessing not. So... She's insulted Red Sox fans with cracks about Fenway and Shilling, She's insluted Catholics and other people of Faith who hold a similar view, what's next? Maybe she can fit in someting about drunken Irish for the hat trick.

tazzygirl -> RE: Martha Coakley: Devout Catholics 'Probably shouldn't work in the emergency room' (1/16/2010 4:45:56 PM)
Im probably going to be the unpopular one here, but, oh well. As a nurse, i dont recall a time where i allow my personal beliefs to undermine patient care.. ever. If a course of treatment is against a nurse's personal beliefs, then, sad to say, perhaps she/he needs to look for another field. Being catholic, or any religion, is a personal choice. Its a personal moral value. Its not a morality we have the right to hold others too in a medical setting.

TheHeretic -> RE: Martha Coakley: Devout Catholics 'Probably shouldn't work in the emergency room' (1/16/2010 4:47:05 PM)
Oops. Have they got Joe Biden doing her interview prep, or what?

LafayetteLady -> RE: Martha Coakley: Devout Catholics 'Probably shouldn't work in the emergency room' (1/16/2010 4:54:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Im probably going to be the unpopular one here, but, oh well. As a nurse, i dont recall a time where i allow my personal beliefs to undermine patient care.. ever. If a course of treatment is against a nurse's personal beliefs, then, sad to say, perhaps she/he needs to look for another field. Being catholic, or any religion, is a personal choice. Its a personal moral value. Its not a morality we have the right to hold others too in a medical setting. Thank you tazzygirl. I was thinking exactly that. quote: I wonder if she thinks non-smokers shouldn't work in bars and restaurants that allow smoking too... I am guessing not. Not if they are going to constantly complain about the smoke. If you are not a night person, do you intentionally take a job working the graveyard shift? Everyone is entitled to their religious views. No one is saying that the medical personnel, i.e. doctors, nurses, pharmacists need to change their views. What is being said is that they aren't allowed to push those views on others, and by doing so refuse to treat a person in the way that is best for them medically. What about the Jehovah Witnesses who don't believe in blood transfusions? Should a nurse who is a Jehovah Witness be able to refuse to do her job if it involves someone getting a blood transfusion? Yes there are alternatives (tazzygirl would be better able to explain them than me), but that isn't that person's choice. See, it's really easy to make that statement when talking about abortions or morning after pills. But the reality is that religious tenets actually do go beyond just the termination of a pregnancy.

Arpig -> RE: Martha Coakley: Devout Catholics 'Probably shouldn't work in the emergency room' (1/16/2010 4:58:29 PM)
Yes you have a right to refuse to participate in any action you find morally repugnant, however you have no "right" to work in an emergency room. Allowing a doctor or nurse to refuse care based on their religious beliefs is akin to allowing them to force others to live by their religious beliefs, so I think she is correct...devout catholics shouldn't put themselves in a position where they are likely to be called upon to distribute contraceptives or perform abortions if they find those actions conflict with their beliefs...same goes for any religion that has issues with whatever action....if you think A is wrong then don't go into a line of work where you will be called upon to do A...simple really & nothing to get your panties in a bunch over.

Lucylastic -> RE: Martha Coakley: Devout Catholics 'Probably shouldn't work in the emergency room' (1/16/2010 5:03:01 PM)
When I was 19 I worked on a unit where a child aged 8 was dying, she needed a blood transfusion, her parents religion says transfusions are a no no. It upset me hugely because I couldnt understand why someone would let their child die because of their belief, almost 30 years later, I still dont get it, it affected me hugely, but I could not say anything, I was a nurse there to perform my duties. If it is such an issue for you to provide abortion or any other care that goes against your principles, then yes you are in the wrong department if not the wrong profession. You should not be allowed to affect a patients rights to want they want/need are entitled to.

DarkSteven -> RE: Martha Coakley: Devout Catholics 'Probably shouldn't work in the emergency room' (1/16/2010 5:17:56 PM)
She's managed to blast through a massive lead due to stupidity like this.

maybemaybenot -> RE: Martha Coakley: Devout Catholics 'Probably shouldn't work in the emergency room' (1/16/2010 5:23:29 PM)
What is being missed in this whole thing is... the bill was about hospitals, basically Catholic Hospital who do not provide abortions or contraception. The rape victim would have gotten treatment and had she requested/desired emegency contraception she would have been transported to another hospital for that, after receiving emegency care. I really don't see anything wrong with that, and I am Pro choice. Catholic Hospitals do not do tubaligations or vasectomies. Should they be forced to do that also ? Should Male Muslim MDs be forced to take on female patients when it is against there religion ? Should a Muslim rape victim be treated by a male doctor, because that is the only gender on duty ? I am a nurse and I would have no problem refusing to do something against my ethics and morals. At the moment I can't think of anything but I recall working with another nurse very recently who refused to be the Case Manager of a patient who was going to have terminal sedation at a time she chose. There were no problems, there were plenty of us who were quite comfortable with that. Please read the following link, with federal Law allowing a nurse to refuse to participate in something she is morally, religiously or ethically oppsed to: snip: The individual nurse has a right to be free from employment discrimination based on religion under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This law requires employers to ensure that reasonable accommodations are available for the religious practices of an employee unless doing so would create an undue burden in the workplace. Title VII also states that an employer may not discriminate against an employee because of the presence or absence of religious practice. The employer is also required to provide a workplace environment free from religious harassment. https://www.nursingcenter.com/prodev/ce_article.asp?tid=799566 And Pro Choice means " choice " not shoving your will down anothers throat. Both choices should be respected. Thats' what we fought for when we legalized abortion. Not to have someone else dictate to us what we can do to our own bodies.

tazzygirl -> RE: Martha Coakley: Devout Catholics 'Probably shouldn't work in the emergency room' (1/16/2010 5:33:00 PM)
i never once advocated for the nurse to lose their jobs. i merely said they should look for other avenues. why open yourself up to the moral inequalities between what is best for your patient and what is best for yourself? i responded to the post. i read the article. i just re-read it and no where does it mention the hospital was a Catholic one. Also, my thoughts on that are mixed. if the hospital is taking government funds, they should not be allowed to hide behind religious beliefs when dealing with the public who contribute to the running of the hospital. be that as it may, i do not hold behind nurses who advocate refusal of treatments because it stands outside their moral compass. again, i dont recall that being part of the oath i took. do you?

popeye1250 -> RE: Martha Coakley: Devout Catholics 'Probably shouldn't work in the emergency room' (1/16/2010 5:40:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven She's managed to blast through a massive lead due to stupidity like this. Poor Martha, stick a fork in her.

AnimusRex -> RE: Martha Coakley: Devout Catholics 'Probably shouldn't work in the emergency room' (1/16/2010 5:43:57 PM)
yet another Fauxtrage. Real Catholics understand where we do our jobs in spite of our religious convictions. Things like working in the penal system, administering the death penalty. Or serving in the military, in unjust wars that are condemned by Church teaching. That sort of stuff. When we go to Mass tomorrow, I doubt there will be any comments made about Martha Coakley.

maybemaybenot -> RE: Martha Coakley: Devout Catholics 'Probably shouldn't work in the emergency room' (1/16/2010 5:48:59 PM)
Tazzy.. Whoa !! Calm down. No where did I say you called for anyone to lose their job. I provided the link to illustrate that this is not new, it has been around a long time or there wouldn't be case law regarding it and Lippincott wouldn't have references to it.. You may have read the article, but have you read the bill in question ? That's what I was ~ trying to outline ~ for you. The fact that no one was going to be refused treatment, simply a 15 minute ride to another hospital. Remember this is Massachusetts, you can't throw a rock without hitting a hospital. As for the oath I took, here it is: I solemnly pledge myself before God and in the presence of this assembly, to pass my life in purity and to practice my profession faithfully. I will abstain from whatever is deleterious and mischievous, and will not take or knowingly administer any harmful drug. I will do all in my power to maintain and elevate the standard of my profession, and will hold in confidence all personal matters committed to my keeping and all family affairs coming to my knowledge in the practice of my calling. With loyalty will I endeavor to aid the physician, in his work, and devote myself to the welfare of those committed to my care. I don't see the part that say I have to do anything against my ethics, morals or religious views. However, I guess I should resign as I have not lived a life of " purity ". I have and still do engage in things that are " deleterious and mischievous " Peace mbmbn

tazzygirl -> RE: Martha Coakley: Devout Catholics 'Probably shouldn't work in the emergency room' (1/16/2010 5:55:02 PM)
lol... im not excited, honest! The fact that no one was going to be refused treatment, simply a 15 minute ride to another hospital. Remember this is Massachusetts, you can't throw a rock without hitting a hospital. Why do they have to ride to another hospital? that part confuses me. this part of the oath With loyalty will I endeavor to aid the physician, in his work, and devote myself to the welfare of those committed to my care. should explain it all. the welfare of our patients is our calling... not our own personal opinions and beliefs.

maybemaybenot -> RE: Martha Coakley: Devout Catholics 'Probably shouldn't work in the emergency room' (1/16/2010 6:09:59 PM)
I think we just disagree on this one. I do not read that line in the oath the same way you do. And I can recall something I did refuse to do. I was working the ER in the 70's and a patient was brought in who put a rifle in his mouth and blew his brains out. We had a hero intern who isisted we would try and save this guy, despite the fact that when we lifted him to get the board under him, what was left of his brains fell on the floor. The MD wanted to continue the code. I, as well as every other nurse and other personel refused. How do you feel about male Muslim MDs being forced to take on female patients against their religious views ? I'm opposed to it. How do you feel about a Muslim rape victim or any emergency situation, actually, being forced to recieve emergency treatment from a male MD if the hospital only has males on duty vs being transported 15 minutes away to get care that is respectful to her religious beliefs ? I'm against it. Would you force youself on her because it was in her best welfare to be treated immediately ? I would not. I'm not trying to argue with you... just see things aren't always balck and white. mbmbn

Lucylastic -> RE: Martha Coakley: Devout Catholics 'Probably shouldn't work in the emergency room' (1/16/2010 6:11:32 PM)
the welfare of our patients is our calling... not our own personal opinions and beliefs. Exactly....

LafayetteLady -> RE: Martha Coakley: Devout Catholics 'Probably shouldn't work in the emergency room' (1/16/2010 6:16:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: maybemaybenot I solemnly pledge myself before God and in the presence of this assembly, to pass my life in purity and to practice my profession faithfully. I will abstain from whatever is deleterious and mischievous, and will not take or knowingly administer any harmful drug. I will do all in my power to maintain and elevate the standard of my profession, and will hold in confidence all personal matters committed to my keeping and all family affairs coming to my knowledge in the practice of my calling. With loyalty will I endeavor to aid the physician, in his work, and devote myself to the welfare of those committed to my care. An argument could be made that the bolded part says exactly that. It doesn't say "devote yourself unless your moral or religious views say not to. It says you will loyally devote yourself. I'm not saying that nurses should be fired or discriminated against. I am saying that a nurse with those beliefs shouldn't work for planned parenthood, as it goes against her beliefs and by taking the job, she is more likely to be pushing her beliefs on to others and have an alternate agenda from the facility with which she is employed. It's interesting though that the only "issues" that are discussed are those issues relating to women, i.e. abortion, tubal ligation, birth control. Yes there is vasectomies for men, but those are typically done in the doctor's office, not the hospital. There are a whole lot of other religious tenets that can cause a question between religious belief and proper, appropriate health care, such as the issue of blood transfusions which was already mentioned. Why are those never discussed? Could it be because the issue isn't necessarily about religion but more about abortion?

tazzygirl -> RE: Martha Coakley: Devout Catholics 'Probably shouldn't work in the emergency room' (1/16/2010 6:20:09 PM)
quote: How do you feel about male Muslim MDs being forced to take on female patients against their religious views ? Why would anyone allow the discrimination against a patient because of a medical providers beliefs? He took our oath, he should perform his job, regardless. So what you are saying is... if the female lay there dying.. he would not touch her.. because she is female.. and you would support that decision. quote: How do you feel about a Muslim rape victim or any emergency situation, actually, being forced to recieve emergency treatment from a male MD if the hospital only has males on duty vs being transported 15 minutes away to get care that is respectful to her religious beliefs ? If its in the best interests of the patient, then its her interests that are my primary concern, and i would be standing behind my patient to ensure she gets what she deserves. Would be no different if the patient was a Muslim man and he demanded a male Dr. If all we had were a female staff, then his rights supercedes ours. quote: Would you force youself on her because it was in her best welfare to be treated immediately ? Force myself on a rape victim? im lost as to your line of thinking here. its the patient we are fighting for. we are their advocates. not the other way around.

LafayetteLady -> RE: Martha Coakley: Devout Catholics 'Probably shouldn't work in the emergency room' (1/16/2010 6:28:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: maybemaybenot I think we just disagree on this one. I do not read that line in the oath the same way you do. And I can recall something I did refuse to do. I was working the ER in the 70's and a patient was brought in who put a rifle in his mouth and blew his brains out. We had a hero intern who isisted we would try and save this guy, despite the fact that when we lifted him to get the board under him, what was left of his brains fell on the floor. The MD wanted to continue the code. I, as well as every other nurse and other personel refused. Key thing here is he was an intern. quote: How do you feel about male Muslim MDs being forced to take on female patients against their religious views ? If they are the only doctor available in the ER and the female patient needs treatment, that is the priority. If her treatment can wait, and the wait is not going to be another hour, then by all means, wait. If not, then the Muslim doctor needs to re-evaluate whether or he should be working in the emergency room where the ability to pick and choose his patients is not available. quote: How do you feel about a Muslim rape victim or any emergency situation, actually, being forced to recieve emergency treatment from a male MD if the hospital only has males on duty vs being transported 15 minutes away to get care that is respectful to her religious beliefs ? I'm against it. Would you force youself on her because it was in her best welfare to be treated immediately ? I would not. The key there is asking why a hospital only has males on duty. In any rape situation, the comfort of the patient is of primary importance. Therefore, it would be up to the ambulance personnel and the people taking the information in the ER to let them know that no females are available and refer them to the next hospital a rock's throw away. Because again, in the case of rape, her religious preference doesn't matter one bit, but compassion for her situation, which could also very likely mean her comfort level needing to be addressed by female medical personnel is the issue. As for Muslim women getting treated in the ER in general. The patient also has a responsibility here. She or her family should also be alerting the ambulance and admission personnel so they can make a decision based on their beliefs. In the end though, if the Muslim woman needs emergency treatment or she dies, or the Muslim doctor has a patient that needs immediate treatment or they will die, then the religious views are secondary, ESPECIALLY in the case of the Muslim doctor.

thornhappy -> RE: Martha Coakley: Devout Catholics 'Probably shouldn't work in the emergency room' (1/16/2010 6:35:34 PM)
She may mean "force your decision" on the rape victim. I can be a big deal to get treatment at another hospital. An ambulance ride's going to cost $500 or so. Then she'll probably be waiting awhile in the waiting room, since it wouldn't be high priority. All that after being raped, instead of getting morning-after contraception. This would be even a bigger problem in rural areas. It's also a problem in pharmacies.

Musicmystery -> RE: Martha Coakley: Devout Catholics 'Probably shouldn't work in the emergency room' (1/16/2010 7:26:47 PM)
quote: yet another Fauxtrage My vote for best coinage of the year (rolling 12 month span).

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

5.078125E-02