(Closed) Should religion influence hospital care?

posted 6 years ago in Legal
  • poll: Your reaction...
    This is awful because of the hypocrisy : (39 votes)
    30 %
    This is awful because fetuses are people and they should pay up : (13 votes)
    10 %
    This is awful because fetuses aren't people and they shouldn't refuse to perform abortions : (16 votes)
    12 %
    This is awful because fetuses are NOT people but they should pay up in this situation anyway : (9 votes)
    7 %
    The hospital's defense is fine, they're not wrong : (4 votes)
    3 %
    Religion should be a part of hospitals and influence care : (7 votes)
    5 %
    Religion should not be a part of hospitals or influence care : (38 votes)
    29 %
    Other (comment!?) : (3 votes)
    2 %
  • Post # 3
    Member
    993 posts
    Busy bee
    • Wedding: May 2013

    The hipocrasy is an issue but I don’t think religion in this case did influence the care, it is malpractice regardless of the type of hospital.  The defense is clearly an afterthought that happens to conflict with other past declared defenses for practice.  

    Post # 4
    Member
    559 posts
    Busy bee
    • Wedding: October 2014

    I’m really not surprised by this, and I find it frankly horrifying all the same.  As noble as the principals that undergird most of Catholic healthcare is — to care for the poor, to be committed to patient care in the spirit of Christian charity, etc — and how necessary Catholic hospitals were a century ago, I find them problematic institutions now.  I do not feel confident in the fact that I would receive every bit of medically necessary care as a non-Catholic woman at a Catholic hospital, especially if I was possibly pregnant, and that’s a frightening thing.  Especially in regions where access to medical care is difficult and Catholic institutions are often the only games in town.  The institutions of the Catholic Church need to take a strong hint from the religious sisters that the US Council of Bishops were so quick to reprimand for spending too much time helping the poor.

    Post # 5
    Member
    4929 posts
    Honey bee
    • Wedding: October 2018

    How awful! Those boys were SEVEN months! That’s… 29/30 weeks? Past the point of viability. Even if you aren’t a “life begins at conception” person and more of “life begins at birth”, you could certainly argue that those babies were CAPABLE of life. This isn’t some case of 12 weeks gestation, where the doctors couldn’t have done anything. They could have, but they didn’t. 

    The moment they realized they couldn’t save the mother, they should’ve been yanking those babies out and trying to save them. 

    I would be beyond furious if I was that dad. He was right to sue the hospital. 

    Post # 6
    Member
    1310 posts
    Bumble bee
    • Wedding: December 2011

    If a hospital is religious in nature they should definitely be able to make decisions based on their founding principles. It’s an important part of freedom of religion in this country.

    I hate to dog on lawyers because there are many good, decent ones but the “defense” in this lawsuit clearly came from an attorney who was just looking for anything to stick.

    Post # 7
    Member
    8098 posts
    Bumble Beekeeper

    Before reading the post, I totally misinterpreted this poll option: “This is awful because fetuses are people and they should pay up“. I thought it was suggesting that fetuses need to pay up for their hospital care. It certainly piqued my curiosity!

    Post # 8
    Member
    5400 posts
    Bee Keeper

    I didn’t read the article but I don’t think it matters if we call fetuses people, because standard medical care would include saving babies when possible. They’re obviously trying to cover their asses with this one. 

    Post # 9
    Member
    5544 posts
    Bee Keeper
    • Wedding: December 2011

    I think this has nothing to do with them being Catholic and everything to do with greedy hospital executives who don’t want to pay a malpractice claim. Tragically when money politics and churches mix nothing good comes from it. 

    That said, most of the.private (and usually religiously affiliated) hosptials are incredible and well equipped and staffed hospital. I interviewed at a Catholic hospital, I’m not Catholic, they can’t really ask and a patient’s religious belief has no impact on their care other than not being able to get an abortion at a Catholic hospital. 

    Post # 10
    Member
    10453 posts
    Sugar Beekeeper
    • Wedding: February 2014

    @Daisy_Mae:  Those darn freeloading fetuses! Haha I read it that way at first too.

    I’m actually really surprised by this. Catholics seem so hardcore about saving a bunch of cells in early pregnancy by being against abortion, but they are doing a real 180 here. 

    Post # 11
    Member
    4047 posts
    Honey bee
    • Wedding: January 2014

    @Pinkmoon:  Right? Catholics are generally so staunchly against abortion at ANY stage, even if it is only a few weeks and very well before viability. They want to save the unborn. But seven months in? No, sorry, we won’t save you even though you’d come out a little early but fine. 

    Post # 12
    Member
    1042 posts
    Bumble bee
    • Wedding: December 2013

    @chasesgirl:  This. It has little to do with what the religion was, but rather that most hospitals don’t want to pay for the malpractice claim.

    And honestly, the argument is pretty solid. The state itself does not define them as people, in a court those are the laws that matter, not what the hospital’s affiliation is. I find the story extreamly tragic and preventable, but the root of the problem is that person is defined in that law as someone who has been born.

    Post # 13
    Member
    1042 posts
    Bumble bee
    • Wedding: December 2013

    I would also like to add that religion SHOULD be part of patient care. Modern healthcare is about the whole human being (or it should be) and the patient’s religious and spiritual views should be respected and encouraged.  A blood transfusion may save someone, but if that does not align with their religion why should healthcare providers be able to force it upon them?

    Post # 14
    Member
    7679 posts
    Bumble Beekeeper
    • Wedding: November 1999

    Declaration of position: pro-life Christian, not Catholic.

    Woah. It’s not that the hospital deliberately didn’t save the babies. It’s that the obstetrician on call didn’t answer his pager so they couldn’t save the babies. Yes I see a case to answer there, but it’s not as if they *deliberately* let them die. There was a (very sad) screw-up.

    But, the hosptial is entitled to claim defence by the laws as they stand. Though personally I think they should admit they messed up.

    Post # 15
    Member
    9116 posts
    Buzzing Beekeeper
    • Wedding: December 2012

    Religion has no purpose in a hospital, or anywhere else that isn’t a church of their particular branch or in the believer’s homes.

    No religion in school.
    No religion in hospitals.
    No religion in government.
    No religion outside of churches. Absolutely no exceptions.

    I think it was wrong to not attempt to save the babies. I agree that unborn fetuses are not people and are not entitled to “adult rights”, but morally if a fetus could be saved via emergency C section, you need to at least humor the idea. The mother was, sadly, going to die regardless. It was unnecessary for the children to die, too.

     

    Post # 16
    Member
    1310 posts
    Bumble bee
    • Wedding: December 2011

    @Hyperventilate:  no religion in a Catholic school? Or in Jewish school?

    the Constitution guarantees ONLY that the government will not establish a religion. so that means, no religious stuff in publlic institutions. Public schools, public hospitals, and so forth.

    Don’t like how the Jews run their hospital? Don’t like how the Catholics run their schools?

    Then don’t go to a Jewish hospital, and don’t send your kids to a Catholic school.

    The likelihood of experiencing an emergency where a religious hospital wouldn’t be able to provide the same standard of care as a public one, is quite miniscule. The only thing they can’t do is perform a direct abortion – even in the case of an ectopic pregnancy, the fetus can be removed at a Catholic institution.

    There is ALWAYS the public option – the public hospital may not be as good, the public schools may not be as good. But you know what, in that case people should put the time and effort in to make the public system better, the way people of faith have worked for centuries to get their health systems and educational programs the best they can be. These institutions contribute hundreds of millions of dollars worth of services every single year that are NOT reimbursed by government programs like Medicare and Medicaid.

    Keep in mind as well that the Catholic Church considers its hospitals to be a direct branch of ministry – many hospitals are still headed and/or staffed by nuns.

    The topic ‘Should religion influence hospital care?’ is closed to new replies.

    Find Amazing Vendors