In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

The 11th Commandment: Thou Shalt Not Give Healthcare to the Women-folk

Jill

A New York hospital may be scrapping its women’s health program — if it merges with a Catholic hospital. The women’s health program offers such Satan-affirming services as counseling, contraception and tubal ligation surgery.

Catholic hospital mergers are a significant issue across the country. Many, many previously secular hospitals have been forced to give up their women’s health care services after the mergers. But women can just go elsewhere for their health care, right? Sure. If there are other providers in your area. If your insurance covers those other providers. If the only medical care you ever need is planned ahead of time, and you never end up in the emergency room after, say, a sexual assault (emergency contraception is a Catholic no-no). And if you do need EC, you can just go to a different hospital, right? It’s simple. Just ask Joe Lieberman.

20 thoughts on The 11th Commandment: Thou Shalt Not Give Healthcare to the Women-folk

  1. Pure and simple, there should be no such thing as a licensed “Catholic” hospital, any more than there should be a Catholic automobile emissions test facility.

    Absolutely, everyone should have every right to participate in all walks of life, but there shouldn’t be anything that falls under the protected umbrella of religion for policy purposes other than churches. Even some elements of schools need to be regulated.

  2. Mergers with Roman Catholic hospitals are a big, big topic for the pro-choice community — thanks for bringing it up. It’s not just mergers, however, that negatively impact access to health services for women. At a Religious Coalition conference earlier this year, I was talking to someone, I think from Indiana, who was saying a local hospital had just entered into a cooperative agreement with a hospital run by Roman Catholic sisters to share a billing system. Because the sisters did not allow a variety of procedures, one woman who had a tubal ligation scheduled after her delivery didn’t get the procedure, because the (secular) hospital was blind-sided by not being able to charge for the procedure in the new billing system.

    Ultimately, we need some kind of patients’ bill of rights that specifically includes guarantees about a range of services for women. And we need state laws that guarantee EC in the ER and other emergency services. At all hospitals, regardless of sectarian affiliation. (It’s not just Roman Catholic hospitals where this is an issue — also some Baptist ones and other sectarian hospitals.)

    Indentally, the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice recently developed a position document that helps people of faith understand some of these issues. It’s called In Good Conscience, and it’s available for free download.

  3. My mom gave birth me in a Catholic hospital, and my dad was apparently quite displeased that it was the policy of the hospital to prefer my life to my mom’s, no matter what the family actually wanted. Does anyone know if that is that still the policy of Catholic hospitals?

    On a side note, sometimes secular hospitals merging with Catholic hospitals will realize the women’s health issue and let another secular organization take over the reproductive services.

  4. Were you in my head? I was thanking TPTB this morning for the fact that my GYN retired just in time for me to switch before the hospital he practiced at was bought out by a Catholic hospital.

    I really had to search to find a practice I was comfortable with, and one that has hospital “rights” at one of only two secular hospitals in my area.

  5. there were some horrific cases in japan of women with pregnancy related emergencies being turned away from multiple hospitals. there is obviously a problem with their health care system. our system that is money-driven and subject to eliminating services that are not profitable or politically safe could end up with the same kind of horror stories. women’s health is under attack from a lot of directions.

  6. Wha? you sure about that? Japan has a very affordable health care system through the government (less than 50/month), but you CAN opt out of it (lots of young ppl do thinking they won’t need it). Maybe this was the case of a few ppl that opted out of a very good and affordable medical system there? i mean, I go to Japan for my health care because I’m still a citizen and I’m enrolled in it. My last few surgeries were in Japan, and I had no issues whatsoever.

  7. At all hospitals, regardless of sectarian affiliation

    So much for the iron wall of separation of church and state. Next, are you going to propose that Quakers be drafted to serve in Iraq? How about feeding ham sandwiches to Jewish and Muslim inmates?

    To me it would make more sense to figure out why the secular hospitals can’t survive on their own, and keep them going. Or why not have government build and operate hospitals? Having Catholic healthcare as your only choice makes as little sense as having Catholic schools as your only choice.

  8. Does anyone know if that is that still the policy of Catholic hospitals?

    RQ, the Catholic Church is a bit roundabout on the question, since it’s in a theological catch-22. Killing the mother = bad. Killing the baby = bad. The solution follows rather torturous logic, but boils down to — if the life of the mother can only be saved by destroying the pregnancy/baby, no procedure can be done with the actual intent of killing the baby, but procedures with the side effect of doing so are ok. This leads to things like removing all or part of the reproductive organs instead of just aborting the fetus.

  10. So much for the iron wall of separation of church and state.

    That wall has been crumbling for some time: these mergers are encouraged by the state.

    From the article:

    The program provides funding for family planning services, but not for abortion — a procedure Amsterdam does not provide. It’s that procedure that has been the cause of controversy at a similar planned merger in Schenectady.

    There, Ellis Hospital is set to take over Bellevue Woman’s Hospital and then merge with St. Clare’s Hospital, according to a plan approved by the state. However, questions remain about whether Bellevue/Ellis will continue to offer abortions and other reproductive procedures once the merger with St. Clare’s is completed.

    From another article, detailing these Shenectady shenanigans:

    New York Gov. George Pataki and the state Legislature in 2005 formed the Commission on Health Care Facilities in the 21st Century to recommend changes to the state’s health care system, which is the most expensive in the country.

    The commission in a December 2006 report recommended closing nine hospitals — including Bellevue Woman’s Hospital in Niskayuna, N.Y. — and reconfiguring 48 hospitals in the state — including merging St. Clare’s Hospital with Ellis Hospital in Schenectady, N.Y.

    From the Commission’s final report (pdf):

    It is recommended that St. Clare’s Hospital and Ellis Hospital be joined under a single unified governance structure

    (…)

    If St. Clare’s and Ellis Hospitals fail to execute such an agreement by December 31, 2007, it is recommended that the Commissioner of Health close one of the facilities and expand the other to accommodate the patient volume of the closed facility.

    Another interesting fact is that St. Clare’s is “in financial jeopardy,” whereas Ellis seems to be doing all right. So, in a way, this merger is also a rescue operation of sorts. And state subsidies somewhere down the road are going to smoothen it out.

  11. I was (almost) denied the morning after pill at a military hospital (the reason given was that they are federally funded and they can’t support such things.) I was insistent and the poor resident I was dealing with finally gave it to me, although I’m sure it went into my chart as a birth control subscription and not for what its actual intent is. Likewise, abortion was not a procedure that was condoned at federal facilities. When I had an abortion, I had to pay for it at a civilian facility even though I was fully insured (I was lucky I lived in a state that offered this.) Of course, this was about 6 years ago… maybe things have changed since then.

    Churches have their place in our medical/social system. They offer many services and often can get them to the intended recipient with much less red tape. Indeed, at a (secular) autism support group I once attended, there was a discussion about how some families of children with disabilities are moving from my state of Virginia to neighboring Maryland because the services their children need are more readily available in that state. One reason cited was that Maryland has a significant Catholic population and the social programs that the Church provides takes up the slack that the state cannot/does not provide.

    I would not expect to be able to obtain an abortion at a Catholic hospital. I would not expect to be denied a legal procedure at a federally-funded facility. But I certainly would not expect the state/federal facilities to team with the Catholic facilities and adopt their restrictions.

  12. St. Clare’s is “in financial jeopardy,” whereas Ellis seems to be doing all right.

    Then, by all means, call the merged unit “Ellis Hospital” where abortions and sterilizations can be performed without violating anyone’s conscience, and emergency contraception can be stocked in the ER.

  13. So much for the iron wall of separation of church and state.

    Separation of church and state doesn’t protect sectarian institutions that provide public services from regulation by government. If Roman Catholic hospitals (or Baptist hospitals, or whatever) want to be licensed as public health facilities, they have to step up to safeguarding the public health, not just the health of people who agree with them on tubal ligations. Just as sectarian universities can’t receive accreditation while dodging the substantive requirements of accrediting agency, hospitals should be held to providing the services women need to be healthy and be able to make choices about their reproductive care. The law currently allows them to shirk their responsibilities, and many states are encouraging them to do so, but there is no Constitutional bar to requiring them to step up to the plate and serve their women patients 100%.

  15. Separation of church and state doesn’t protect sectarian institutions that provide public services from regulation by government.

    Even if government regulation is paramount, you probably would would have a problem with a state that prohibited hospitals from performing abortions. I have a problem with states forcing one to violate her or his conscience. And many hospitals limit the services they provide. Procedures like heart surgery or organ transplant surgery are best done at high volume hospitals, with the most experienced personnel, so smaller hospitals have closed those units down. If you need these services, you have to go to a hospital that is willing to perform them. Especially few in number are the hospitals that are capable of doing bone marrow transplants. Malpractice costs may make obgyn the next department to go. Not to mention hospitals who limit their patients to children and or women. I doubt St. Jude’s Children’s Research Hospital is performing many elective tubal ligations.

  16. We’ve had the same issues in Canada, however thankfully the mergers were disallowed.
    And I have to say, I am totally stealing the phrase “Satan-affirming services”

  17. I have a problem with states forcing one to violate her or his conscience.

    This is just a non-starter when it comes to medicine. Should Christian Scientists be allowed to be licensed as doctors and then treat their patients with prayer alone? Should Scientologist physicians be licensed as psychiatrists if they’re going to refuse to treat patients in accordance with established psychiatric practice? If someone isn’t willing to provide basic medical care to women, they shouldn’t enter the medical field, or they should choose a specialization more in keeping with their religious beliefs.

    Furthermore, offering EC in the ER is not a service that requires a lot of expertise. A tubal ligation is a basic procedure that any fully-staff delivery ward should be able to provide.

  18. I’m sorry, Chris. I thought you supported freedom of conscience.
    Oh, and do you realize why a Scientist would never study medicine, nor a Scientologist, psychiatric medicine?

  19. I’m sorry, Chris. I thought you supported freedom of conscience.

    Prospective medical providers who refuse to provide the full range of health services to women have complete freedom of conscience — they can choose not to become OB-GYNs or ER doctors, or they can choose not to enter medicine entirely. That’s exactly the same freedom afforded to pacifists, Quakers, Scientologists, and every other group that has been brought up in this thread. No one is forcing Quakers to enlist; likewise, no one is forcing traditionalist Roman Catholics or full-quiver fundamentalists to become OB-GYNs or pharmacists.

  20. making a moral stand where another person bears all the consequences is like making a donation with someone else’s money. in fact, some of these moral stands are being made by people and institutions supported by the tax dollars of all of us, including those of us who might be denied services.

Comments are currently closed.