Catholic controlled hospitals denying rape victims right to choose

Discussion in 'Religion Archives' started by Bells, Jan 11, 2007.

  1. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    That's right folks. Rape victims who are taken to or go to Catholic controlled hospitals will now be denied the right to choose not only the morning after pill, but also the right to be referred to a rape crisis centre that may offer women the morning after pill.

    Now, if this were only in private hospitals that were Catholic, that would be another story altogether. But sadly, this will not just apply to hospitals owned by the Catholic Church. It will also apply to public hospitals that the Church has won the right to run. This means that government funded hospitals run by the Catholic group will now also deny rape victims the right to choose whether to have a morning after pill and be denied the right to be referred to a rape crisis centre that offers the services.

    Imagine if you will if a woman has been raped and the only hospital within reach is a Catholic run hospital (be it public or private) and if this woman wishes to take the morning after pill to prevent a pregnancy as a result of the rape, she would be denied this treatment due to the Church's doctrine and views on abortion. Doctors and rape crisis centres are correct to be worried in the way the Catholic Church is quietly going around buying out control of both private and public hospitals.

    Indeed. Denying a rape victim the choice of a morning after pill can result in that victim having to face an even more difficult decision later on if she finds herself pregnant and carrying her rapist's child. The morning afterpill just ensures that a pregnancy cannot occur. Shouldn't it be up to the rape victim to decide whether or not she wants the chance of a pregnancy to occur as a result of her rape? No one is saying she is forced to take the pill. But to deny her the choice is tantamount to a further assault on the victim. And to deny her referral to rape crisis centres that offer the pill is frankly ridiculous. Denying her access to help is contrary to what hospitals are meant to offer the public. If they are to take such a stand, why are they taking Government funding for such services when they are then going to deny women the right to choose whether to take the pill? Hospitals are there to treat patients. They are not there to ensure victims of rape be further victimised due to a religious doctrine.

    Not only are rape victims affected, but also women and couples who are seeking fertility treatment as the Catholic Church has also deemed that all fertility treatments that offer IVF will also be banned from their hospitals, both public and private. Fertility clinics are being told to move on from hospital grounds (both private and public) if said hospitals are run by the Catholic organisation.

    As I said, if this were the case in private Catholic hospitals, then it would be their choice. But to subject public hospitals that they have won the right to run and to force them to follow private church doctrines while being funded by the State is fundamentally wrong. So much for the notion of separation of church and state.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Prince_James Plutarch (Mickey's Dog) Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,214
    It's a Catholic institution.

    They get to decide what they will and not allow.

    Don't go to a Catholic hospital if one wants a morning after pill, or a referrral to such.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    I'm glad to see they are doing their part to end the popularity of Catholicism.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    Are there a lot of hospitals not run by religious organisations?
     
  8. John99 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    22,046
    there are plenty, but lets proceed for persecution purposes.
     
  9. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    If it were just Catholic hospitals, then that would be different as I said before. However the Catholic Church group has also been granted the right to run public hospitals. Which are not funded by the Catholic Church but by the State and taxpayers money. The public hospitals run by the Church are in no way private. However they are enforcing their private religious values into the public domain in the forms of public hospitals.

    We aren't talking about a woman turning up to a hospital seeking the morning after pill. We are talking about women who have been raped and have gone to or been taken to hospital for treatment and care that a rape victim would normally get. Now imagine if the only hospital in your area is a public hospital that is sadly run by the Church and they refuse to allow you access to the morning after pill or to tell you where you can go to get the pill and rape counselling? Don't you think a rape victim has been through enough? Or do you think rape victims should be forced to face a possible pregnancy caused by their rape?

    Yes there are. But in some areas of Australia, the distance between hospitals can be hundreds of kilometres. And if the only hospital in the area is run by the Catholic Church and it can be private or public, rape victims being taken to these hospitals will not be allowed to gain access to the morning afterpill to prevent a pregnancy from occuring from her rape, nor will they refer her to a rape crisis centre that does. Now rape crisis centres exist for a reason, not just to provide the pill, but also rape counselling and support to rape victims. Denying them access to such services can and will lead to the victim feeling further victimised by the very place that is there to help her.

    The Catholic Church health group runs more than 70 hospitals in Australia, including 21 public hospitals. That's a lot and they are in the process of quietly acquiring more, both private and public. Now again, if it were a case of a privately run hospitals, then it is their hospital. But when they include public hospitals that are funded by the Government, then it is the Church intruding and forcing their private beliefs on the public to the detriment of not only rape victims, but couples and women who wish to access the IVF system.

    This is not a case of persecution. Merely a question of whether a Church has the right to impose their religious doctrines in public hospitals in such a fashion.
     
  10. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    What about social services? Can they help?
     
  11. Prince_James Plutarch (Mickey's Dog) Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,214
    Bells:

    Are you certain that it is giving the Church control of a public hospital? Or that the hospital has essentially been sold to the Church?
     
  12. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    Not if they work in the hospital. As it stands now the staff who work in all hospitals run by the Catholic Health Group are not allowed to prescribe the abortion pill or refer any woman who has been a rape victim to a rape crisis centre that may provide such services unless they can ensure that the woman is not pregnant.

    Now if a woman is raped and bought in the same day of her rape, she would have to wait until it can be determined if she was pregnant as a result of the rape and would only be referred to a rape crisis centre (which provides access to the morning after pill) if it is found she were not pregnant.

    In the big urban areas, women can get access to other hospitals that can counsel her or refer her to crisis centres so she has a choice and can get the help she needs, whatever that may be. But in rural areas where if the only hospital for hundreds of miles also offers rape counselling and happens to be run by the Church, it could result in women being forced to go ahead with pregnancies that are a direct result of her rape. I can't even imagine the horror of such a situation. As I said, if it were a private hospital owned by the Church, then it is their right to run it as they so choose. But to impose their religious beliefs in public hospitals as well, then it is fundamentally wrong. Hospitals accept State and Federal funding for the services they provide and some of these hospitals run by the Church (both private and public) are accepting race counselling funding and not providing it as it is meant to be provided. Instead they are taking State funds and using it to further their own religious doctrines even in public hospitals.
     
  13. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    No. The Catholic Church health group now also runs several public hospitals.

     
  14. Prince_James Plutarch (Mickey's Dog) Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,214
    Ah, I see.

    Here in America, though, we've had a case in regards to ethical decisions on the part of doctors and pharmascists. It was given to them to say "no" to any treatment they had a moral problem with. A pharmascist who thought the morning after pill, or the abortion pill, was immoral would not have to give the pill to someone, nor would a doctor have to perform an abortion.

    I do have a bit of a problem with the mandate for -everyone-, considering it is not a Catholic institution at heart.
     
  15. If you accept public funds then you have to restrict your religous doctrine to off time. the boy scouts rejected public funding rather than allow gays in. that is their right. but if you work for a public position and you are ethically unable to provide a service then at the very least you should be required to direct people to services.
     
  16. Prince_James Plutarch (Mickey's Dog) Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,214
    Actually, personal ethics was upheld, again, in America to be okay with ruling one's medical decisions, so long as that did not rob someone of consent.
     
  17. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    I will be honest and say that it should be up to the individual. Doctors in their own practices and pharmacists who own their own business should not be forced to do something they are fundamentally against. However they own private businesses that are not dependent on public funding. Catholic run public hospitals (as well as private hospitals) are receiving funding from the Government to provide set services to patients. In the case of a public hospital run by a Church, it should not be up to that Church to enforce its religious beliefs on the public at the expense of the State.

    They aren't only denying women the right to an informed choice, they are also closing down fertility clinics (even in public hospitals run by them) that provide IVF treatments because they are against IVF. Yet they receive funding for providing fertility services.

    And I have to agree with her. If you say you provide the service, you provide the whole service and not just the shortened version based on a religious belief. In some areas women only have access to one hospital and may have no where else to go. As she said, imagine a rape victim arriving in the middle of the night and then being told she cannot access the full rape crisis services there and will have to find one for herself the next day.

    No one is saying they should push the morning after pill. But in a public hospital (at the very least), rape victims should not be told that this state funded hospital won't offer her that service and she'll just have to go elsewhere because the hospital administrators are Catholic and refuse to allow patients access to abortion or morning after pill that could prevent pregnancy.
     
  18. 4534 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5
    sad, but I can understand their decision since it's their domain.
     
  19. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    Private hospitals yes (since they own and run it) even though I find their ideology in this regard to be frankly ridiculous.

    Public no.
     
  20. Prince_James Plutarch (Mickey's Dog) Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,214
    Bells:

    What about doctors who work in public hospitals? Do you object to them refusing to give assistance on moral grounds? Noting that ethics plays a huge part in modern medical care?

    That is corrupt. They ought to not be funded for that which they do not provide.
     
  21. Oniw17 ascetic, sage, diogenes, bum? Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,423
    Aussies are lames.
     

Share This Page