Genetic Testing and choice

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-11-2008
Genetic Testing and choice
49
Sat, 01-26-2008 - 9:51pm

With genetic testing and posible engineering seeming more and more the reality of our near future, many believe that screening/engineering for disease, sexual orientation and gender will become common place.

 "Pascal's Wager," which states that believing in God costs you nothing if you're wrong, and wins you everything if you're right.

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-03-2007
Sun, 01-27-2008 - 10:53pm

Oh, whoa I don't mean turning away all PLers, there are way too many women who present themselves for an abortion saying that they are PL and heading back to the picket line next week. I've heard of one clinic where they actually had a check-box at the bottom of the intake form asking if the patient is prolife, in order to provide more sensitive counseling.

I'm talking about the specific situation where after all that counseling, one provider tells the story of having a patient actually on the table after all that counseling and everything, aggressively confronting the physician on the table as they prepared for her termination. The provider was so startled and alarmed by the depth of her anger that she asked, "do you actually think *I* am a murderer?" and the patient responded so vehemently and personally that she felt as though to go ahead with the procedure would be to invite later repercussions. The patient was invited to seek her abortion elsewhere and given names of other clinics.

Do you think that a professional must provide an abortion in this instance? In general practice of medicine a physician is allowed to "fire" a patient as long as the patient can reasonably get care elsewhere, and I support the same for pharmacists. (morning after pills are time-sensitive, keep in mind - and I think you don't intend to refer to RU-486 and pharmacists, as pharmacists cannot get licensed to dispense that medication. Please revisit your pill vs. pill vs. pill basic facts).

In this particular instance, with a personal attack from a patient sounding truly unbalanced, in a field where providers are assassinated, I think I would have done the same.

***
What I think you were assuming was that a provider was in general refusing PL patients, which I would not support and have never heard of.




Edited 1/27/2008 11:02 pm ET by wobitnobby
iVillage Member
Registered: 05-09-2007
Sun, 01-27-2008 - 11:12pm
<

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-06-2004
Sun, 01-27-2008 - 11:30pm
I'm not okay with the cultures that produce people who consider being female or gay a birth defect. I'm okay with any reason any woman has, as long as it is her reason alone and not a result of pressure by any other person, for aborting prior to viability. Post-viability is a stickier issue for me.
iVillage Member
Registered: 01-11-2008
Mon, 01-28-2008 - 7:36am

There is not a waiting list of newborns looking for parents - rather a list of parents waiting for newborns.

 "Pascal's Wager," which states that believing in God costs you nothing if you're wrong, and wins you everything if you're right.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-29-2005
Mon, 01-28-2008 - 9:03am

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-29-2005
Mon, 01-28-2008 - 9:17am



Can you link us to the study/report where you got this information from?


iVillage Member
Registered: 04-10-2003
Mon, 01-28-2008 - 9:25am
Thanks Marie- very interesting- I wonder what the real error rate is on it? The fact that Acu-Gen won't publish it's accuracy sends up a red flag for me. Women should have that data available too.

.
.
.

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-09-2007
Mon, 01-28-2008 - 9:55am

<>


You missed my point. The newborns that would have been aborted are unwanted by the women who are pregnant with them.


<

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-06-2007
Mon, 01-28-2008 - 10:15am
RU480 is dispensed at the doctor's office. Not at a pharmacy.

melissajune21.jpg picture by ambersspace


&nbs

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-03-2007
Mon, 01-28-2008 - 10:30am

1) I'm on maternity leave, not at the medical school library so I can't download and append the pdf files of the original study which provides the hard data, but I can post the name of it, if you happen to have a personal license to Family Planning Perspectives. The article is 14:2, pp 53-60, March/April 1982, by Henshaw, S.K. and G. Martire. Abortion and the Public Opinion Polls: 1. Morality and Legality. That study found that 24% of women who had abortions considered the procedure morally wrong, and 7% of women who'd had abortions disagreed with the statement, "Any woman who wants an abortion should be permitted to obtain it legally."

A reference which is available without subscription is this, which includes a list of personal stories of providers finding people opposed to abortion in their clinic seeking abortion. It's anecdotal, but it matches perfectly with what I've heard directly from providers I'm in contact with through medical school. Sometimes they are quiet about it but you recognize the faces from the picket line. Sometimes they are visibly mad. I don't know if I'd feel comfortable assisting a woman to undergo a procedure she clearly and explicitly believed was wrong. Seems like a setup for her to have terrible emotional repercussions, and no one wants that. Here's the link, but it's such interesting reading I might post the contents. Anyone interested?
http://mypage.direct.ca/w/writer/anti-tales.html

2) On denial of care. Within medicine, if a patient can reasonably get care in a time frame which will not affect health outcomes, a physician can deny care. MAP is rather exquisitely time-sensitive, with efficacy dropping several percentage points each day. If the patient does not suffer any delay in service or public shaming from being denied in a public forum of a pharmacy (as opposed to the private forum of an exam room) then I see no problem in refusing to provide MAP. In other words, as long as the pharmacy has someone else on staff to provide the prescription right then and there, it's okay for them to employ a pharmacist unwilling to provide care.

The comparison is very weak though. If any patient came into a pharmacy and told the pharmacist, "I think you're a murderer!" all in their face, I doubt they'd even get a script for antibiotics filled! It's just such an unbalanced way to apply for medical service that anybody would be skeeved.

The comparison would be stronger if a provider was trying to not provide for any PL patient, but no - she simply didn't want to provide to one patient being aggressive to her. And I think that's okay, or at least the patient's bizarre behavior merits further workup. We don't want to provide abortions to women who are showing signs of mental illness without investigation, do we?