GPs, Abortion and Conscientious objection .. maybe elsewhere in other walks of life too?

robut

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 6, 2008
Messages
8,729
GPs who refuse to refer on patients seeking an abortion will need to respect 'law of the land'

Conscientious objection would also be provided for under the new regime, Harris said – adding that GPs who objected to abortion would have to refer patients elsewhere.

Some GPs who took part in TV debates had said they could not, in good conscience, do that – and that they would refuse to refer women on.

“The law of the land will be very clear on that,” Harris said.
A Doctor on Conscientious objection grounds being allowed to refer, I would think this is fair enough. But then we have this comment under the above article I found interesting and maybe worthy of debate:

.. but what about the baker who refuses to make the cake for the same sex couple?
Though this was in another jurisdiction/country ( Northern Ireland ) .. I assume the same ability of Conscientious objection & being able to refer should be in place across our society, not just restricted to doctors in abortion cases?
 


benroe

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 29, 2011
Messages
12,094
I support anyone's right to not bake an abortion cake.
 

automaticforthepeople

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 22, 2012
Messages
4,671
I read on Twitter that Declan Ganley has post the referendum discovered he has a conscientious objection to paying taxes towards the state that will be used to fund abortion in the HSE.
Under 2013 legislation abortions are already being carried out in Irish hospitals. Declan's conscience only seems to kick in when he gets a political kicking at the polls.

If he ever gives up politics, Declan will have a career in self satire.
 
D

Deleted member 17573

It would certainly seem that consistency would require the same general principle to apply to the baker as to the doctor. It seems that an interesting precedent is being created.
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,782
GPs who refuse to refer on patients seeking an abortion will need to respect 'law of the land'



A Doctor on Conscientious objection grounds being allowed to refer, I would think this is fair enough. But then we have this comment under the above article I found interesting and maybe worthy of debate:



Though this was in another jurisdiction/country ( Northern Ireland ) .. I assume the same ability of Conscientious objection & being able to refer should be in place across our society, not just restricted to doctors in abortion cases?
The gay cake case turned on whether or not the message to be iced "Support Gay Marriage" was what is protected political speech in NI. It would not be in the Republic or the rest of the UK neither of which have laws protecting political speech. The court went further and stated it was also direct discrimination against a gay man because his political speech was inextricably linked to his sexual orientation, a mistake IMO, but nevertheless the law in NI, the Republic and GB protects people from discrimination by private businesses or public bodies or individuals on the grounds of gender or sexual orientation.

That is a distinct issue from "conscientous objection" which is defined quite differently, especially in the context of publically funded organisations.
 

stopdoingstuff

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 26, 2011
Messages
22,430
Doctors who perform abortions are killers. They should feel shame.
 

Pizza Man

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 5, 2015
Messages
898
It would certainly seem that consistency would require the same general principle to apply to the baker as to the doctor. It seems that an interesting precedent is being created.
It's not a serious problem. Any hassle from members of the ICGP and Simon will import loads of Asian GPs who will be happy to prescribe abortions on demand. Sure, their qualifications may be substandard,but they'll fit the job spec to a T.
 

xennial

Active member
Joined
May 27, 2018
Messages
274
Twitter
No
It's not a serious problem. Any hassle from members of the ICGP and Simon will import loads of Asian GPs who will be happy to prescribe abortions on demand. Sure, their qualifications may be substandard,but they'll fit the job spec to a T.
harris is vile little drone
 

xennial

Active member
Joined
May 27, 2018
Messages
274
Twitter
No
would anyone change doctors over this? Im pretty sure I might change gps if it becomes an area of cultural fracture over the coming years
 

Pizza Man

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 5, 2015
Messages
898
harris is vile little drone
He is actually. Whenever I see him on TV (and this has nothing to do with the abortion referendum!) I feel my flesh creep involuntarily.

The only other TD in Leinster House who makes me feel that way is Ruth Coppinger!
 

statsman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 25, 2011
Messages
55,055
GPs who refuse to refer on patients seeking an abortion will need to respect 'law of the land'



A Doctor on Conscientious objection grounds being allowed to refer, I would think this is fair enough. But then we have this comment under the above article I found interesting and maybe worthy of debate:



Though this was in another jurisdiction/country ( Northern Ireland ) .. I assume the same ability of Conscientious objection & being able to refer should be in place across our society, not just restricted to doctors in abortion cases?
When condoms became freely available across the counter, pharmacies had freedom of conscience as to whether or not they would stock them, and a lot refused. When was the last time you were in a pharmacy that doesn't now stock condoms?
 

xennial

Active member
Joined
May 27, 2018
Messages
274
Twitter
No
He is actually. Whenever I see him on TV (and this has nothing to do with the abortion referendum!) I feel my flesh creep involuntarily.

The only other TD in Leinster House who makes me feel that way is Ruth Coppinger!
yeah I wanted to like coppinger but shes clearly creepy as ************************
 

Telstar 62

Well-known member
Joined
May 28, 2013
Messages
26,604
GP's who don't toe the line already being threatened.

The purge begins, led by Commissar Harris.:shock:
 

Half Nelson

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2009
Messages
21,430
would anyone change doctors over this? Im pretty sure I might change gps if it becomes an area of cultural fracture over the coming years
I would never have anything to do with a "doctor" who cooperated in killing children.

That would be like getting your flu jab from Herr Mengele.
 

Sync

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
29,596
They’re different cases. If the chap in the North had gone to a bread shop and demanded they make a cake saying happy gay whatever, it would be fine to say no. They don’t make cakes.

Similarly if the gp does handle abortions but says they won’t handle it for a gay/black/Buddhist because of their orientation/colour/religion, then it’s an apt analogy/
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,782
OP might be interested to know that under equalities legislation, a doctors right to conscientous objection is very narrowly circumscribed. For example, a female Muslim GP cannot refuse to treat male patients because her religion forbids her to be alone with a man she is not married or related to.

There are only two specific procedures which medical staff can object to performing and those are abortion and fertility treatment. The burden is on them to show good faith. They cannot however refuse to assist in any ancillary care or to provide information about the procedure or where to access it. This would be direct discrimination against a pregnant woman, which is illegal, or a nonpregnant one on the basis of her gender, (only women can get pregnant).

There are further safeguards that where conscientous objection clashes with the patients right to treatment, eg in an emergency, a doctor cannot refuse to perform a necessary operation in the absence of any one else prepared to do it and claim conscience. That is negligence, pure and simple. No defence of religious scruples.

There are very good reasons for this because a rather shocking British survey of medical students showed a significant proportion would be prepared to withhold treatment from people whose illnesses were life-styled related (eg smoking and drinking).

They had to be firmly reminded that it is a disciplinary offence to attempt to impose ones religious, conscientous, political, or other personal views on a patient. You can only tell them their health is at risk not their bloody immortal soul.
 

Telstar 62

Well-known member
Joined
May 28, 2013
Messages
26,604
Clear as day that Simon Harris isn't going to respect the conscientious objection
of GPs and other doctors.

Referring on is NOT an option when an innocent life will be ended....
 

Notachipanoaktree

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 26, 2013
Messages
8,137
OP might be interested to know that under equalities legislation, a doctors right to conscientous objection is very narrowly circumscribed. For example, a female Muslim GP cannot refuse to treat male patients because her religion forbids her to be alone with a man she is not married or related to.

There are only two specific procedures which medical staff can object to performing and those are abortion and fertility treatment. The burden is on them to show good faith. They cannot however refuse to assist in any ancillary care or to provide information about the procedure or where to access it. This would be direct discrimination against a pregnant woman, which is illegal, or a nonpregnant one on the basis of her gender, (only women can get pregnant).

There are further safeguards that where conscientous objection clashes with the patients right to treatment, eg in an emergency, a doctor cannot refuse to perform a necessary operation in the absence of any one else prepared to do it and claim conscience. That is negligence, pure and simple. No defence of religious scruples.

There are very good reasons for this because a rather shocking British survey of medical students showed a significant proportion would be prepared to withhold treatment from people whose illnesses were life-styled related (eg smoking and drinking).

They had to be firmly reminded that it is a disciplinary offence to attempt to impose ones religious, conscientous, political, or other personal views on a patient. You can only tell them their health is at risk not their bloody immortal soul.
Hang on here a tick. Which mad Northern Witch are you again, Eagle or Petajam. I think you're confusing yourself. Let's be absolutely clear that what transpires here for rhetoric is purely for augments sake and no offence should be given ye vache folle
 


New Threads

Most Replies

Top