Author
|
Topic: Rape Survivour Denied EC
|
audra trower williams
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2
|
posted 03 February 2004 08:14 PM
quote: DENTON, Texas (AP) -- About 40 people gathered outside an Eckerd pharmacy Monday, protesting what they said was a decision to deny a rape victim a prescription for the morning-after pill.A spokesman for the Florida-based company confirmed that Eckerd has taken disciplinary action in response to an incident at the store. "Apparently there was a request for a prescription to be filled and the prescription was denied based on a moral or ethical decision made by the pharmacist, and that's not in accordance with our corporate policy," said Joan Gallagher, vice president of communications for Largo, Florida-based Eckerd Corp.
fucking disgusting.
From: And I'm a look you in the eye for every bar of the chorus | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469
|
posted 04 February 2004 02:21 PM
quote: why not just go to planned parenthood, naral/caral, or some other similar agency?
If your tax dollars are already funding a public hospital, why should you have to? I agree with Michelle: yank their funding, effective immediately. If they want to make moral choices a prerequisite for medical care, then they should foot their own freight. Cease any and all transfer payments and watch them wither. Then open up a new public hospital as soon as they've slunk off. I'd suggest the same for any religiously funded high-school that doesn't obey the Charter to a 'T'. Wanna forbid a gay couple from coming to the dance? Fine, as long as you have $42 million to cover next year's operating budget, and don't mind if your graduates don't receive official Secondary School accreditation from the province.
From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469
|
posted 04 February 2004 02:34 PM
quote: Except, I don't even want them to try to make it on their own because I don't believe in two-tier health care and privately-funded hospitals.
I dunno. I have to think that with zero government help, they'd flounder in a hurry. I'm sure some funding would be found, but not nearly enough... and I doubt that some Catholic parent is willing to pay $1500 out of pocket to have their kid's sprained ankle looked at just so they can force women to carry pregnancies to term. And if they did pay up, and if the hospital did survive, what do I care? As long as we save the cost of that hospital we can apply it to a new hospital, or better fund existing hospitals. It takes nothing from me. And the two-tier system might work great for schools, namely because our tier would be the one who pay only taxes and receive a diploma upon graduation, and theirs would be the one who pay out of pocket and receive fuck-all upon graduation. Best o' luck getting a job when your diploma isn't endorsed by the government. Have you considered the priesthood? Hehe.
From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rebecca West
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1873
|
posted 05 February 2004 02:00 PM
If I were a medical practitioner, nothing this side of hell would convince me to perform an abortion. However, I would not prevent others from performing that service, and I wouldn't have a problem referring a woman to those services.Not everyone who is against abortion is against choice. Religion often has nothing to do with it, though I agree with Michelle that the church needs to keep it's big nosy parker out of people's private lives and personal decisions. I have a big ethical problem with terminating a potential human being, but a potential pregnancy? Every time a sexually active, reproductively viable woman ovulates, it's a potential pregnancy. To want to exert that kind of control over a woman's body is like demanding the right to repeatedly rape her. No one should be forced to perform tasks that challenge their fundamental ethics, but where certain individual choices are concerned, they shouldn't be permitted to force their ethics on others either.
From: London , Ontario - homogeneous maximus | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469
|
posted 05 February 2004 02:01 PM
I'd add one thing: if you work in the cafeteria, or another wing in the hospital, or whatever, stay away from the area where procedures that offend you take place. Frankly, I wouldn't put it past some busybody orderly to take a few minutes out of their lunch to try and counsel some poor misguided women. Employees need to know that this would cost them their job on the first offence.
From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Lima Bean
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3000
|
posted 05 February 2004 02:46 PM
quote: I wouldn't go so far as to bar people from working at the hospital who disagree with abortion or other "medical" procedures. As long as there were enough staff to meet the demand for the procedures that would suffice.
It would be difficult to ensure that all the employees in the whole hospital weren't anti-choice/anti-abortion, granted. I do think, though, that if a doctor has an ideological opposition to performing certain necessary procedures, they should look for a line of work or a practice that doesn't call upon them to even have to contemplate it. I think it's unethical for any gynecologist or obstetrician to do some parts of their job but not all. Respect for the patient's needs and choices should be fundamental and if it's not possible for a doctor to maintain enough respect for their patients to honour their request for an abortion, they should be working in podiatry or something. It's like a dentist not wanting to pull teeth... I know it's not that simple, but I think it's extremely stupid for someone to work in a profession with a scope beyond their own ideological boundaries. They must know at the outset of their specialized study that they'll be required to perform abortions, and if they're not prepared to deal with that appropriately when the time comes, they should come up with a different specialization. I guess the same goes for pharmacists who don't believe in contraception, emergency or otherwise. That's what I think, anyways. [ 05 February 2004: Message edited by: Lima Bean ]
From: s | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
audra trower williams
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2
|
posted 05 February 2004 04:13 PM
I think apologies are in order, lagatta.As far as other medical staff go, it's tricky. A friend of mine was recently referred by her doctor to the hospital for an abortion. A week went by and the hospital never called. So I pressured her to call back. The receptionist (who squealed "YAY! A BABY!" when she saw my friend's positive test for pregnancy) snapped that she'd faxed it, but she'd fax it again. 4 days go by, no call. So I made my friend call again, and the other receptionist said "The form is right here. It's not even all the way filled in yet. There is no way it was sent." Enraging. [ 05 February 2004: Message edited by: audra estrones ]
From: And I'm a look you in the eye for every bar of the chorus | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|