Doctor Refuses To Care For Gay Couple's Baby - Is This Conservative Media's "Religiou

[TrueBlue]

Doctor Refuses To Care For Gay Couple's Baby - Is This Conservative Media's "Religious Freedom"?

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/02/19/doctor-refuses-to-care-for-gay-couples-baby-is/202580


"A Michigan pediatrician refused to work with the baby of a same-sex couple, citing her anti-gay religious beliefs. It's another case that highlights the potential dangers of conservative media's campaign to champion "religious freedom" in the face of anti-gay discrimination."

====================================
Thanks to Media Matters for this report. What were Conservatives thinking? You have to know that it's quite bad when a doctor, sworn by the Hippocratic Oath, refuses to treat an infant who is a complete innocent. A baby has nothing whatsoever to do with whatever personal prejudices or religious beliefs a doctor may have so as to have their health potentially compromised due to lack of treatment because of a doctor's refusal to treat them.

But this is yet another example of the far-reaching effects the new "Religious Freedom" law has, not only on pizza parlors or wedding cake places but on Medicine, Hospitals, Clinics, Nurses and Doctors, places that are vital to a human being's health and well-being. That has to be the lowest of the low when they, as professionals, have come to conclude that they will not see infant or child patients due to their parent's sexual orientation. No doubt the AMA, the AAP and other associations strongly disagree with their views and actions.

[Calypso Jones]

oh how freaking convenient. a 2014 story and you want to associate it with a newly passed protective law in Indiana when 30 states have similar laws.

IF this story is valid, then that's just freaking too bad. The baby was not in an emergency situation. THEY CHOSE the doctor they said. THEY were provided with another doctor but they don't want the other doctor. What they want to do is to force someone to bend to THEIR wishes. and the left wants to use this to bang the drum of liberal Marxism....you do it my way or you don't do it anyway. Is that right? EVERYONE has had doctors say no I can't treat you for one reason or another. Get over it.

[Mister D]

Do you even know what the Hippocratic Oath entails? Secondly...


The couple was instead met by a different pediatrician, who they had not selected.

Oh, the horror!

[Calypso Jones]

Welcome to REAL Ville.

[Mister D]

oh how freaking convenient. a 2014 story and you want to associate it with a newly passed protective law in Indiana when 30 states have similar laws.

IF this story is valid, then that's just freaking too bad. The baby was not in an emergency situation. THEY CHOSE the doctor they said. THEY were provided with another doctor but they don't want the other doctor. What they want to do is to force someone to bend to THEIR wishes. and the left wants to use this to bang the drum of liberal Marxism....you do it my way or you don't do it anyway. Is that right? EVERYONE has had doctors say no I can't treat you for one reason or another. Get over it.

LOL The story is from 2014?

Most of these partisan sites have absolutely no respect for their readers.

[Crepitus]

LOL The story is from 2014?

Most of these partisan sites have absolutely no respect for their readers.
Just how long ago do you think 2014 was?

[Mister D]

Just how long ago do you think 2014 was?

Last year.

[TrueBlue]

Last year.
Exactly! But the story could have been five or even ten years old and it wouldn't have mattered. What does matter is the behavior on the part of prejudiced doctors who refuse to treat an infant just because their parents happen to be Gay or Lesbian. That is abhorrent.

What if the infant had been to the point of death and there were no other doctors around? What then? What if a child was having trouble breathing and the only doctor close to them was one who doesn't like Gay or Lesbian parents? Well, unfortunately, just let the kid die right? Of course, because his or her parents are Gay or Lesbian, otherwise, the kid could live. That's Conservatives for you folks. The lowest of the low when you think about it. This is simply too Outrageous and Despicable for words!

[Mister D]

Exactly! But the story could have been five or even ten years old and it wouldn't have mattered.

Well, yes, it would have mattered. It would have it even sillier to try and make the connection in question. Why do you dignify websites that think you're an idiot?

[MisterVeritis]

Well, yes, it would have mattered. It would have it even sillier to try and make the connection in question. Why do you dignify websites that think you're an idiot?
Some people are eager to confirm it. Gruber never had it so easy.

[Mister D]

Some people are eager to confirm it. Gruber never had it so easy.

Quite frankly, any "source" that has contempt for its readership doesn't deserve one.

[Peter1469]

It is Media in Tatters. Likely a b.s. story altered to fit an activist agenda.

[Calypso Jones]

it matters that it is an old story because you're grasping at straws to frighten/enrage a public that is already so over this. But don't leftists say never let a good crisis/story go to waste.? Just out of curiosity, don't you see what the problem is with the story and your faux outrage?

this was a standard, well baby checkup, meet the doctor and something tells me the 'parents' knew exactly what they were doing and what doctor they were contacting. Do we even know for sure that the doctor is Christian and not hindu? regardless, no baby would ever be turned away in an emergency situation, just as no illegal, uninsured, homeless person would either. It doesn't happen.

You do know about the young thug in Georgia that needed a heart transplant about 2 years ago and the hospital said no for him based on transplant protocols? Parents screamed racism and he got his heart...that;s called tyranny by the minority. He then went on a crime spree just last week, wont the first, and he hurt a few people, wrecked the car and killed himself. Where's your outrage or do you have any?

[Dr. Who]

I am going to go against type on this one. This was not an emergency situation. If the doctor did not feel that she could form the appropriate relationship with the parents because of her beliefs, she was doing the couple a favor by not saddling them with a doctor that would be awkward, uncomfortable and judgmental every time she saw them. If there is one situation where you want to feel comfortable, it is with your child's pediatrician or GP. I would like to think that if it were an emergency situation, there would be no question in this doctor's mind about treating the child, however this was about creating a long term doctor patient relationship that the doctor was wise enough to know would not really benefit the couple in question and probably lead to bad feeling all around.

[Chloe]

it matters that it is an old story because you're grasping at straws to frighten/enrage a public that is already so over this. But don't leftists say never let a good crisis/story go to waste.? Just out of curiosity, don't you see what the problem is with the story and your faux outrage?

this was a standard, well baby checkup, meet the doctor and something tells me the 'parents' knew exactly what they were doing and what doctor they were contacting. Do we even know for sure that the doctor is Christian and not hindu? regardless, no baby would ever be turned away in an emergency situation, just as no illegal, uninsured, homeless person would either. It doesn't happen.

You do know about the young thug in Georgia that needed a heart transplant about 2 years ago and the hospital said no for him based on transplant protocols? Parents screamed racism and he got his heart...that;s called tyranny by the minority. He then went on a crime spree just last week, wont the first, and he hurt a few people, wrecked the car and killed himself. Where's your outrage or do you have any?

You can't really blame the parents for doing or saying whatever they could to get their son a new heart since I'm sure they felt super desperate. It's a shame that the new heart he received didn't make his character better though.

[TrueBlue]

it matters that it is an old story because you're grasping at straws to frighten/enrage a public that is already so over this. But don't leftists say never let a good crisis/story go to waste.? Just out of curiosity, don't you see what the problem is with the story and your faux outrage?

this was a standard, well baby checkup, meet the doctor and something tells me the 'parents' knew exactly what they were doing and what doctor they were contacting. Do we even know for sure that the doctor is Christian and not hindu? regardless, no baby would ever be turned away in an emergency situation, just as no illegal, uninsured, homeless person would either. It doesn't happen.

You do know about the young thug in Georgia that needed a heart transplant about 2 years ago and the hospital said no for him based on transplant protocols? Parents screamed racism and he got his heart...that;s called tyranny by the minority. He then went on a crime spree just last week, wont the first, and he hurt a few people, wrecked the car and killed himself. Where's your outrage or do you have any?
That's an apples to oranges comparison only you're too naive to know and realize it. Since when is a mature teen or grown-up to be compared with an innocent little baby, an infant? Only in your convoluted mind and way of thinking. They, however, are one and the same by your comparison. Sad.

[zelmo1234]

Exactly! But the story could have been five or even ten years old and it wouldn't have mattered. What does matter is the behavior on the part of prejudiced doctors who refuse to treat an infant just because their parents happen to be Gay or Lesbian. That is abhorrent.

What if the infant had been to the point of death and there were no other doctors around? What then? What if a child was having trouble breathing and the only doctor close to them was one who doesn't like Gay or Lesbian parents? Well, unfortunately, just let the kid die right? Of course, because his or her parents are Gay or Lesbian, otherwise, the kid could live. That's Conservatives for you folks. The lowest of the low when you think about it. This is simply too Outrageous and Despicable for words!

What if the child had just flown in from the planet Pluto and it was completely green with bright yellow poke-a dots and was singing Rolling stones tunes?

What we know is the child did not have any of those things going on, so that does not come into this decision

While this Doctor was an ass - hole of the highest degree. Can we leave the Drama out of it.

[TrueBlue]

I am going to go against type on this one. This was not an emergency situation. If the doctor did not feel that she could form the appropriate relationship with the parents because of her beliefs, she was doing the couple a favor by not saddling them with a doctor that would be awkward, uncomfortable and judgmental every time she saw them. If there is one situation where you want to feel comfortable, it is with your child's pediatrician or GP. I would like to think that if it were an emergency situation, there would be no question in this doctor's mind about treating the child, however this was about creating a long term doctor patient relationship that the doctor was wise enough to know would not really benefit the couple in question and probably lead to bad feeling all around.
Still, it's quite scary for the public who depends on doctors to find that they would rather put sexual orientation before treatment of any type which is exactly what they're there for whether it be ordinary or emergency treatment. They're there as healers not judges. If they are to be prejudiced and judgmental in that manner then they are in the wrong profession and should just leave it posthaste.

[Dr. Who]

Still, it's quite scary for the public who depends on doctors to find that they would rather put sexual orientation before treatment of any type which is exactly what they're there for whether it be ordinary or emergency treatment. They're there as healers not judges. If they are to be prejudiced and judgmental in that manner then they are in the wrong profession and should just leave it posthaste.
Fortunately all doctors are not cut from the same cloth. However Doctors and patients often find themselves at odds with each other, with doctors firing patients and vice-versa. It is best for all concerned that a primary caregiver has a good relationship with the patient or their guardians.

[TrueBlue]

Fortunately all doctors are not cut from the same cloth. However Doctors and patients often find themselves at odds with each other, with doctors firing patients and vice-versa. It is best for all concerned that a primary caregiver has a good relationship with the patient or their guardians.
What they should have is a good, compassionate heart to begin with. Then we wouldn't be seeing all of these problems.

[hanger4]

What they should have is a good, compassionate heart to begin with. Then we wouldn't be seeing all of these problems.

Agreed. BTW that's a two way street.

[Adelaide]

A physician ethically has the responsibility to treat anyone (besides family members) that comes to them. Say for example, if a school shooter arrives at a hospital the surgeons can't elect not to treat the shooter - they have no choice for good reason. If a physician can't handle that responsibility they should have become a lawyer or something where you get to pick and choose to some extent.

[silvereyes]

oh how freaking convenient. a 2014 story and you want to associate it with a newly passed protective law in Indiana when 30 states have similar laws.

IF this story is valid, then that's just freaking too bad. The baby was not in an emergency situation. THEY CHOSE the doctor they said. THEY were provided with another doctor but they don't want the other doctor. What they want to do is to force someone to bend to THEIR wishes. and the left wants to use this to bang the drum of liberal Marxism....you do it my way or you don't do it anyway. Is that right? EVERYONE has had doctors say no I can't treat you for one reason or another. Get over it.

Funny. Ive never been denied treatment.... so thats a lie.

[MisterVeritis]

A physician ethically has the responsibility to treat anyone (besides family members) that comes to them. Say for example, if a school shooter arrives at a hospital the surgeons can't elect not to treat the shooter - they have no choice for good reason. If a physician can't handle that responsibility they should have become a lawyer or something where you get to pick and choose to some extent.
Why do you think that? What about a plumber? Do they have an ethical obligation? Or a home handy man? Auto mechanic? Everybody except for you and lawyers? Is this the beginnings of the New Slavery?