Comments by "SmallSpoonBrigade" (@SmallSpoonBrigade) on "Catholic Hospital Turns Away Bleeding Woman For IUD" video.

They're medical professionals, they don't get to make decisions based upon morality that would lead to bad health outcomes for the patient. They only get to make decisions based upon their medical training and judgment about how to best help the patient. This is a case where the doctors chose to provide no care to a woman that clearly needed it for reasons other than medical judgment. They should be kicked out of the profession until such a time as they decide they want to be professionals. I'm sure there are doctors out there that would prefer not to provide treatment for stupidity induced injuries, but they provide treatment anyways because they're professionals that actually care about their patients.
4
That's not a Catholic insurer, that's a normal insurer. The plan probably only provides Catholic hospitals because they're cheaper as they don't provide a lot of the services that people might need.
3
Historical Banana So, in other words, you're either a troll or you've got the morality of a klansman.
2
You make it sound like there's a choice. Around here the Catholic hospitals have been merging with the other hospitals and pretty soon it's going to be challenging to find care that isn't provided at these hospitals. So, even if the individual providers aren't Catholic, they're still bound by the hospital policies and can lose their lease if they break them. The problem here is a group of Catholics trying to control what non-Catholics do.
2
Barry Stamour I see, so I'm dealing with a troll. Kudos to you.
2
Historical Banana So, it's OK to not let black eat at a restaurateur's establishment because he doesn't like them? Because that's more or less the same thing here. Except that nobody has to eat at a restaurant, we have the option of buying and preparing our own food. People who go into the medical profession have an obligation to serve anybody in need. If you can't do that, then that's not an occupation to go into. Let somebody with more professionalism have those spots at the university.
1
That Ducking Banana It's not how I choose to look at it, it's the only way that things actually function. What happens when you personally offend the medical care provider by whom you are? Some of us can't count on getting decent medical care because of bigoted medical professionals and it's a very tough position to be in as there are restrictions on whom is allowed to provide medical care.
1
That Ducking Banana Not really, in many parts of the country you don't have many options for care. If you're in a big city, you might have many options, some of whom may even be on your plan. But, for those not living in town, it can be a challenge. Not to mention if you're a sexual minority, in which case it can be damn hard to find a competent doctor willing to provide service. Bottom line here is that if you don't have that dedication, then don't go into medicine. There's plenty of people interested in practicing medicine, don't deprive them of their spot in school if you're not going to do your job.
1
That Ducking Banana You don't see it because you're being obtuse. People choose to go into medical care, nobody is forced to do that. We had a system where people weren't required to provide service equally and it led to all sorts of discrimination. And what happens if you're in an area where all the medical providers choose not to serve you? In a big city the likelihood of that happening is rather small, but if you already have a limited pool of options available, losing a couple to discrimination has a substantial impact on your ability to get properly treated. Bottom line here is that gays and lesbians get dropped by there doctors all the time. And even if they aren't dropped, they don't receive competent care. But that's Okiedokee by you because nobody should be forced to provide services they don't want to provide. Personally, I don't think that people should be allowed to discriminate based upon their own bigoted beliefs.
1
Barry Stamour They aren't the only ones willing to spend money on it, they're just willing to spend more than other groups are. Plus, this isn't a matter of profits, this is a matter of providing medical care to people in need. These mergers are mostly unnecessary and the relevant agencies shouldn't be approving them. Just because the Catholic Church is morally bankrupt, doesn't mean that the rest of us should suffer.
1
Barry Stamour That's absolutely ludicrous. The Catholic Church isn't on the same side of reproductive rights as the Democrats and that's been true for decades. Perhaps you should do some actual research before people getting the idea that you're a fool.
1
Perhaps we need to stop letting the Catholic organizations buy out non-Catholic hospitals. They'll pay lip service to not doing this sort of thing, but once the mergers happen there's not really anything to be done about it. If the authorities force the issue, then there's protests, if they don't, then people get substandard care or no care at all for things that the Catholic Church doesn't approve of.
1
No, it doesn't, that's just what you pay. I'd be very surprised if the cost of providing emergency room care was much less expensive in New Zealand than it is here. The difference is that because New Zealand's medical system is set up to be more cost effective, the coverage covers more of the cost of the emergency room visit than if you didn't have coverage at all. But, if you didn't have coverage, I doubt very much that the cost of visiting an ER would be much lower than it is in the US. It's just very expensive to keep the personnel and testing equipment available on that basis.
1
Cailin Tunnicliffe Again, it doesn't cost $50, that's what you pay, the government pays something on top of that. Most of the cost of ER service is having the equipment and technicians there in case somebody needs care. The equipment isn't any cheaper in New Zealand than it is anywhere else. I don't disagree without priorities, but if you're going to set people straight, you should probably know what you're talking about. People with health insurance here don't pay much more than you do, I think my plan charges $75 for the service.
1
***** That's not possible. Somebody has to pay for the equipment and the tests, labor costs are likely lower than they are in the US, but there's no way that the cost of multi-million dollar, high precision equipment is that much lower there than it is in the US. The numbers don't compute. Either the numbers are inaccurate or the quality of care in the ER is substantially lower than it is in the US. There's no way that the equipment necessary to run an ER is that much lower than it is in the US. More likely, you're referring to something that isn't an actual ER, in which case we wouldn't be spending $1k for that either. Even in the ICU, $1k here is a lot of money. I remember spending an entire night in the ICU and the better part of two days in a hospital and the cost for that was roughly $18k before insurance, IIRC. Like I said, there's no way that your spending $50 for something that costs us $1k, $300 or even $500 I could believe, but there's no way that the cost is 5% of what ours is without massive cost cutting measures taken at the expensive of quality.
1