And I thought I was being paranoid.

[tikiera]

http://abcnews.go.com/US/print?id=271501


Scariest part?

"If those initiatives are part of a broader effort to reaffirm lifetime fidelity in marriage, they're worthwhile," he said. "If they're isolated - if we don't address cohabitation and casual divorce and deliberate childlessness - then I think they're futile and will be brushed aside."

Add the fact the conscience clause was added to 'let the government continue to function' bill, you know, the one that lets doctors, pharmacists, hospitals, _insurers_ refuse treatment or referral if their 'conscience' forbids it - i.e. abortion, birth-control, etc...

Comments

Medical Treatment

[ngrylilasianboy.livejournal.com]

Coming from a long family line of medical professionals...

NOTHING obligates a doctor to give you desired medical treatment. PERIOD.

This holds particularly true when the medical professional is not the only available option for non-emergency medical care.

A doctor *can* refuse to treat someone for any number of reasons, ranging from the simple truism that what a patient wants isn't always what a patient needs; to the factual example that treating such a patient may be considered to be morally/ethically harmful, such as an escaped violent convict.

The precedent has always existed that healers aren't *forced* or obligated to care for others, and I can say it's always been a tiresome assumption to have to explain that to people who think they are somehow entitled to the treatment and drugs they want, as if they cthonically know what they *must* have, without the benefit of medical and life experience that a doctor has. While I am pro-choice, I think that presuming that people are *entitled* to any kind of medial treatment or procedure is somewhat blind and caters to a "Me! Me! Me!" mentality. It's the same reason why most people in my family think that free healthcare is a stupid pipe dream that was sold to the masses by fast-talking demagogues.

The article you posted above doesn't really address the issues of goverment funding to hospitals and clinics, but the simple question for why anyone should expect the government to fund (non-emergency-services) elective surgery and medication such as abortion and birth control seems to be what you are most concerned about. From a purely practical standpoint of financial responsibility, it shouldn't have to. Those are areas the private sector can and historically has taken care of more than adequately- so long as there are not issues with legality. I think contemporary people have gotten spoiled and expect that everything is the government's responsibility, and that somehow miracle money will come from the magical money tree on Capitol Hill; and yet when that funding even remotely looks like it's going to be cut off, people scream bloody murder and think their rights are somehow being oppressed.

Let's be realistic. Despite all your worrying and agonizing over the abortion and birth control issues, those basic options are likely never going to be rescinded from modern society. What we are witnessing is the best (and the worst) that the demagogues can deliver to their constituents, namely cutting out the public funding. What we are seeing today, and likely to face in the future, is the very financially understandable and expected withdrawal from the foolishness of promising more than you can deliver. In this case, it's connected to the wide-ranging issue of socialized medicine, which simply isn't feasible here in the U.S. Perhaps once upon a time, when doctors had more freedom to be healers and actually made house-calls, things might have been different. But the legislation and administration demands that have been imposed upon modern health-care professionals and groups have bloated and swollen the entire profession and industry; so that to attempt it through government spending would create a state of debt so heavy, the process would collapse the system within a matter of years. You can thank the precedent of a litigious culture here within the U.S. for the bloating and crippling of what was once a noble profession.

(split for word-count reasons)

Re: Medical Treatment

[ngrylilasianboy.livejournal.com]

In any case, I've begun to ramble into a bit of a rant. I think the general point I was trying to comment upon was that you oughtn't be surprised by the recent trend, nor should you over-react either. The expectation that you have of doctors seems to be pretty low, given the fact that (with the exception of a few specialists and plastic surgeons) most physicians are in the business of healing people... because they aren't in it for money, playing politics, or for imposing their ideals over others. The profession simply doesn't lend itself to those qualities, that's a job for organized religion. In fact, the sheer number of physicians I've known with anti-authority "God" complexes would make me think many would do things for the sheer spite of being told/nudged not to do them. To be frank, there *are* quite a few physicians out there with "God" complexes. :-)

So don't go all Chicken-Little on me, and "scream the sky is falling". I'd predict we'd need to see an armed revolution take place before any *major* changes in our societal structure happen. But then again, I have a very low opinion of our people in general... I don't think that America has it in her to make drastic changes anymore. The people have gotten too lazy and dumb. Status Quo is the new God.