Hospital caves in over mum’s ‘evil’ surgery

Hospital caves in over mum’s ‘evil’ surgery

Under the threat of a lawsuit, a Catholic-affiliated hospital in California this week agreed to an ‘intrinsically evil’ sterilisation procedure for Rachel Miller, above.

According to the American Civil Liberties Union, the Mercy Medical Center caved in after ACLU threatened legal action.

It approved a previously denied a doctor’s request to perform a post-partum tubal ligation, also known as “getting your tubes tied” on Miller.

Elizabeth Gill, of Northern California’s ACLU, revealed on Tuesday:

The approval was received yesterday, just days after we sent a letter on behalf of client Rachel Miller, charging that the hospital had unlawfully denied her reproductive health care.

Rachel and her husband have one small child and are eagerly expecting the arrival of their second baby next month. They have always known that their family would be complete with two children, so at the recommendation of her doctor, Rachel decided that she would like to get her tubes tied – a safe, standard and highly effective form of contraception – after she gives birth to their second child in late September.

Her doctor fully supports this plan, as performing the procedure at the time of a C-section is the standard of care.

However, the hospital where Rachel is scheduled for delivery is part of a Catholic hospital system, and operates under binding “ethical and religious directives” issued by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.

Applying these directives, which refer to sterilisation for the purpose of contraception as “intrinsically evil,” the hospital denied Rachel’s doctor’s request to perform this common procedure.

Rachel was shocked that the hospital wouldn’t allow her doctor to perform the procedure and tried to appeal, without success. Because she is herself a lawyer, Rachel then thought to seek legal support from the ACLU.

Gill added:

After we sent a letter late last week threatening to file a lawsuit if the hospital didn’t allow Rachel’s doctor to perform the tubal ligation, the hospital agreed to grant an exception and Rachel’s doctor is now scheduled to perform the procedure when she gets her C-section.

While this is certainly a win for Rachel, there remains a clear conflict between the best interests of patients and the directives of the Catholic hospital system. All women should be able to make the medical decisions that are best for them, in consultation with their doctors. And religious institutions that provide services to the general public should not be allowed to claim religion as an excuse to discriminate or deny important health care.

She concluded:

Rachel is lucky — she stood up for herself, and she is getting the health care that she and her doctor have decided is best for her. But as long as Catholic hospitals are allowed to apply the ethical and religious directives, many women will be denied care because Catholic bishops are telling medical professionals how to operate.

17 responses to “Hospital caves in over mum’s ‘evil’ surgery”

  1. Brummie says:

    In this overpopulated world….

  2. C Turner says:

    They ban it because?

    1) there is a shortage of people?
    2) now she can have rumpy pumpy without getting pregnant?

    bad girl bad girl!

  3. Angela_K says:

    Religion doing what it does best: infringing on the rights of others. Her body, her choice. All the major religions are determined to destroy the World by over-breeding; this is also used as a method of colonisation as is currently happening in Europe.

  4. Broga says:

    @Angela_K: I wonder how many immigrants who flood into Europe come from these Muslim country paradises. And having fled the Muslim paradise do they bring their perverted faith with them and with it the threats to those who do not believe.

    I think the time will come when the C.of E. will seem like the good old days. Unless we wake up and encourage rational thought, objective biblical analysis and a critical approach to religion.

  5. Trevor Blake says:

    Also from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU): “Because all of the surrounding hospitals with labor and delivery wards are also Catholic, Rachel would have needed to travel over 160 miles to get her tubal ligation covered by her insurance at the same time as her C-section.”

    Not stated is whether 160 miles is more, less or the same distance she travelled to get to Mercy Medical Center.

    My freethought allows the free thought of Rachel Miller to seek and obtain surgery and the free thought of some physicians to decline to perform that surgery. Forced surgery on a patient draws quick and appropriate comparisons with tyrany. Forced surgery by a doctor should as well. What is forced is not free.

    If a hospital receives penny one of secular state taxes, they should have no religious exemptions or expectations to their services. The ACLU article does not state the forced surgery occurred in a tax funded hospital.

    If anyone is ignorant about the reasons theists hate and mistrust atheists, this is an example of one: supporting and celebrating free thought for some by removing free thought from others. Criticism and mockery are fine parts of free thought. Lawsuits are always the polite face of state violence .While lawsuits have their place they should be used to defend and expand free thought, not redistribute free thought from one to another.

  6. Cali Ron says:

    FYI: Mercy Medical Center is not the only hospital with labor and delivery wards (both my children were delivered in the same city at another hospital), but it may have been the only one her insurance covered.

    @Trevor: It’s doubtful that she had to travel 160 miles to the hospital. I believe that’s a reference to the nearest other hospital her insurance covered and it was probably in San Francisco, which is about 160 miles from Mercy. It was not forced surgery (not sure why you thought it was), it was elective and her decision to have it. Her doctor was not employed by the hospital (he has a private practice),it was the hospital that he was going to perform it at. The hospital is catholic, but has many non catholic patients (my uncle was one for heart surgery). It does except payment from government entities like Medicare.

    Typical catholic intrusion into patients personal choice. As long as they except non-catholic patients and money they have no right to restrict patient access to standard elective medical procedures.

  7. Cali Ron says:

    Another example of fake religious persecution?

  8. Cali Ron says:

    @Trevor Blake: I’m curious why you wrote “Lawsuits are always the polite face of state violence. While lawsuits have their place they should be used to defend and expand free thought, not redistribute free thought from one to another.” She’s filing a lawsuit against a private hospital who is denying her rights to quit infringing on those rights.

    Did I misunderstand your comments? Did you misunderstand the article?

  9. If you go into the hospital business, you should provide standard of care. Religion should have NOTHING to do with it. Bishops should not be running health care systems.

  10. barriejohn says:

    I was initially thinking along the lines of Trevor Blake here, but, as Cali Ron points out, no one is being forced to carry out a medical procedure that he is opposed to, though we are not talking about abortion here, just sterilization (why is that so “evil”?). There are some good comments on the ACLU site, which echo what commenters above have stated, though others are bleating about “religious persecution” again! Here’s another example of religious sensibilities being offended in a quite ridiculous way (just in):

  11. L.Long says:

    Fear of Gawd!! NO way! The RCC fears only one thing…the lose of gold!

  12. barriejohn says:

    Here’s some good news for these lovers of personal liberty: Donald Trump is going to take on the “War against Christians”. About time too – let’s hope that they will soon be able to celebrate Christmas again!

  13. rcc ka ching $$$$$$$ says:

    Catholic Hospitals???

    Ah yes …medical care is a giga buck industry in the USA. Where there is money to be made the rcc is there with its nose in the trough.

  14. dennis says:

    its a woman’s right one kid or no kid. the protestants are just like the c of e and rcc with this insane venture into family dynamics. Doctors and hospital administrators have been pushing their beliefs on families just as the non cake makers under that idiot idea of ” its against my religion” stupidity. the difference is its in the board rooms at the hospitals and hidden under “health reasons” for the female not in your face at the cake counter.
    @Trevor “what is forced is not free” an entrepreneur is not a god only a business man trying to make a Dollar that’s were the line is. keep your religion at your church not in my face during business hours. the same goes for the doctor he is no different than an entrepreneur take them off the pedestal.

  15. Trevor Blake says:

    Cali Ron: The forced surgery was that the hospital was forced to conduct surgery. You and I agree the patient has a legal right to seek surgery – do you think the doctor has no legal right to refuse to perform it? If as you say the hospital accepts government money then we agree there too. If the hospital is privately funded we may disagree. Thank you for your questions!

  16. barriejohn says:

    Trevor Blake: The hospital was refusing to allow HER OWN DOCTOR to carry out the procedure on their premises. That is the sticking point here, for the reasons given.