Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Florida health care can now be denied based on moral, ethical, religious beliefs

pnj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–47 of 47 posts

Re: Florida health care can now be denied based on moral, ethical, religious beliefs

#41

Post by positron6000 »

ars wrote: post #37
calgarymicro wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So a doctor could refuse to prescribe PrEP or treat STDs? Also, it does look like services could be denied to specific people based on gender identity or sexuality, per the article. > While the legislation says that health care providers can't use it to deny care based on a patient's race, color, religion, sex or national origin, attempts by Democratic lawmakers to extend those protections to gender identity and sexu…

> So a doctor could refuse to prescribe PrEP or treat STDs? Only if the doctor felt that the treatment, not the illness, not the person, the treatment. Was against their moral beliefs. The article lies and pretends it's about the person. This is not true.

> The article lies and pretends it's about the person. This is not true.

can you back this up? where in the bill text does it say this? i've read through it and nowhere does it make a differentiation between denying care based on "treatment" vs "person".

Re: Florida health care can now be denied based on moral, ethical, religious beliefs

#42

Post by positron6000 »

ars wrote: post #38
hgsgm wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So like, if I believe that it's immoral to touch a gay person, and I am an EMT who encounters a bleeding gay person?

Nope. That will not work because the bill says services not people. The doctor can prefuse to perform specific services, nothing in the bill permits then to refuse to treat specific people.

> Nope. That will not work because the bill says services not people.

no it doesn't. it says that services can be denied based on moral objections. people are the ones that receive those services.

Re: Florida health care can now be denied based on moral, ethical, religious beliefs

#43

Post by toyg »

ledauphin wrote: post #31

If there's anyone left in the comment section now that this has been flagged and consigned to the outer darkness... Please take a moment and imagine a world in which software developers were all forced to spend 4 weeks a year building drone missile AIs for Palantir so that the US can bomb weddings in Yemen. Further imagine that you started your career before the US had drones, so the possibility that your skills woul…

The only "objectionable" therapy, out there in the real world, is abortion. Roe vs Wade is from 1973, literally 50 years ago. That means any doctor who graduated before RvW is now well past retirement age, and so is under no obligation to administer anything.

Unless the problem is not the therapy, but the patient, in which case I agree that there are definitely doctors out there who graduated when it could be expected of them never to serve gays and minorities; but this law, according to its supporters even here on HN, is definitely not about that, so your comment is irrelevant.

Re: Florida health care can now be denied based on moral, ethical, religious beliefs

#44

Post by sirsinsalot »

ledauphin wrote: post #25
sirsinsalot wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that medical professionals should be paid to administer treatment to human beings, regardless of the situation. It is a human. They should be all treated the same unless the patient requests. To do anything else is immoral rot. What next, denial of treatment to someone you don't like? Or someone who committed a crime? Sorry, I don't treat shoplifters, your cancer is God telling you that you did wrong America…

I have to imagine you're more capable of having a serious philosophical discussion than this sounds. There is a huge difference between offering to treat only those whom you like, and offering to do only the types of procedures you believe are "good". We have rightly outlawed the former for many categories of supposed goodness/badness. But forcing people to start performing new treatments that are the societal cause…

Any medical professional that turns down, for example, a hormonal treatment or tubal ligation or vasectomy ... a treatment that could improve a human being's quality of life ... based on their own morality or religion ...

They're no doctor to me. I'd be disgusted with that action. IMHO that isn't the doctor's decision. The only decision is, will this improve or extend the patient's quality of life and abide by the patient's consent?

The government or medical regulators should make the decisions for the entire industry EXACTLY so these decisions are not left to the medical professional. Their opinion on what's moral or not should not come into it.

Don't compare tech jobs with medicine. Yes, I can decide not to work in defense because I don't want to help build machines that kill. That's a moral decision.

A doctor is making decisions that often relate to immediate, critical and long-lasting actions to other humans. Other people.

The US medical system does it's best to devalue human life, so this isn't a shock.

What if you were denied medical treatment based on a moral disagreement by a medical professional? Maybe they were a different religion to you, and found helping you would damage their chances at going to their afterlife?

To get there, they're going to help you on your way to yours.

While the law tries to make it so it isn't always case-by-case, but rather allows broad exclusion ... the outcome is the same.

Ultimately, this is cultural cleansing. Conform, or be punished.

The lack of compassion and tolerance is sickening. This is far-right conservatism dressed up as liberalism.

Again, standard US.

I'd imagine that in the case of religious discretion, their God would judge them harshly.

Re: Florida health care can now be denied based on moral, ethical, religious beliefs

#45

Post by [deleted] »

sirsinsalot wrote: post #44
ledauphin wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have to imagine you're more capable of having a serious philosophical discussion than this sounds. There is a huge difference between offering to treat only those whom you like, and offering to do only the types of procedures you believe are "good". We have rightly outlawed the former for many categories of supposed goodness/badness. But forcing people to start performing new treatments that are the societal cause…

Any medical professional that turns down, for example, a hormonal treatment or tubal ligation or vasectomy ... a treatment that could improve a human being's quality of life ... based on their own morality or religion ... They're no doctor to me. I'd be disgusted with that action. IMHO that isn't the doctor's decision. The only decision is, will this improve or extend the patient's quality of life and abide by the pa…

[deleted]

Re: Florida health care can now be denied based on moral, ethical, religious beliefs

#46

Post by gfodor »

lokar wrote: post #32
gfodor wrote: post #17

Certainly it's debatable if doctors should be able to deny treatments they think aren't harmful but they see as religiously offensive. But the root disagreement here is primarily about harm, and we already have agreed as a society that doctors have a duty to not knowingly harm their patients. If you can frame something as a civil rights issue, that can help resolve some conflicts but doesn't do much in terms of resol…

I don’t agree that it is up for debate. The profession has clear ethical standards, you know them when you begin training.

Everything in a free society is debatable. I was using that sense of the word.

Re: Florida health care can now be denied based on moral, ethical, religious beliefs

#47

Post by SamoyedFurFluff »

ledauphin wrote: post #28
SamoyedFurFluff wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Frankly I’m very skeptical of the language of the bill. I can’t really think of a specific medical procedure that can be broadly blanket banned on religious grounds that doesn’t come off as extreme or discriminatory: even if one is against abortion, helping to expel a dead fetus is the exact same medical procedure. Even if one is against hormone replacement therapy for trans people, the process of assisting low-testo…

I'm very confused by your comment - where does the language of the bill say anything about _banning_ medical procedures? And do you get the impression that there are a lot of (or any) doctors in Florida qualified to expel dead fetuses who would prefer to refuse that medical procedure? Or is this just a very detailed straw man?

> And do you get the impression that there are a lot of (or any) doctors in Florida qualified to expel dead fetuses

Just so you know, all gynecologists can do this. Miscarriage occurs in upwards of 1/3 pregnancies, and if the body doesn’t expel the fetus the gynecologist has to do it, known as a d&c and is basically just an abortion.

I’m pointing out that I’m co fused by the idea that a doctor can refuse to perform a procedure on moral or religious grounds but cannot discriminate on who that procedure is on, because I can’t imagine any single procedure that would be opposed to on sincere belief grounds that isnt discriminatory!

Post reply on HN