This was enough to wake me up from my post-Katrina despondence
Remember when we here at WTG were up at arms about pharmacists taking it upon themselves to deny emergency contraception to women on the basis of so-called "conscience"? Remember how the ladies at feministing warned people that it would lead to health care workers being permitted to refuse to treat, for example, gays and lesbians because it would be "against their religion"?

This issue isn't going away. From the Washington Post:

Health Workers' Choice Debated
Proposals Back Right Not to Treat

By Rob Stein
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, January 30, 2006; Page A01

More than a dozen states are considering new laws to protect health workers who do not want to provide care that conflicts with their personal beliefs, a surge of legislation that reflects the intensifying tension between asserting individual religious values and defending patients' rights.

About half of the proposals would shield pharmacists who refuse to fill prescriptions for birth control and "morning-after" pills because they believe the drugs cause abortions. But many are far broader measures that would shelter a doctor, nurse, aide, technician or other employee who objects to any therapy. That might include in-vitro fertilization, physician-assisted suicide, embryonic stem cells and perhaps even providing treatment to gays and lesbians.

Don't you love how the fundies are framing this one? Health workers' choice? But wait, there's more:

At least nine states are considering "right of refusal" bills that are far broader. Some would protect virtually any worker involved in health care; others would extend protection to hospitals, clinics and other health care facilities. Some would protect only workers who refuse to provide certain health services, but many would be far more expansive.

At least five of the broad bills would allow insurance companies to opt out of covering services they find objectionable for religious reasons. A sixth state, Pennsylvania, is considering a bill designed for insurers.

Welcome to Gilead, folks. This is exactly what it looks like. A nation where insurers can refuse to pay for AIDS treatment, where ambulance drivers can refuse to transport patients to the hospital to obtain treatment the driver opposes, where doctors can refuse to tell patients when inoculations are due because she believes the vaccine is derived from "immoral" fetal tissue harvesting, where nurses can disregard patients' express do-not-resuscitate orders, and yes, where women will have to drive two hundred miles away to fill a prescription for emergency contraception. Think I'm exaggerating? Go read the article. Those are all possible outcomes.

And, this is just another reason why filibustering Alito MUST BE DONE. He will rubber-stamp any of these laws that pass and are appealed to the Supreme Court. Without a doubt.

So go visit Vichy Dems, and make some phone calls, people.
- posted by TJ @ 5:26 AM