[John Mayes]

Originally Posted by mickey100

A bill was was recently signed into law by the governor of Florida which states healthcare professionals, including insurance companies, can't be forced to violate their religious and moral/conscience convictions in order to treat a patient. Florida healthcare can now be denied based on moral, ethical, or religious beliefs.Its not just doctors, its ambulance drivers, hospitals, nurses, insurance companies, etc. So a pharmacist could refuse to fill a prescription for birth control. A doctor or nurse could refuse to help deliver the baby of a single woman, due to her lifestyle choice. An ambulance driver could refuse to pick up a gay person with Aids. The law is extremely discriminatory against LGBTQ people. A gay person in a nursing home could find themselves at risk of losing health care services, for example. I find this absolutely horrifying that it is now legal in Florida for doctors and other health care professionals to deny health care to anyone simply because they feel like it. We should be increasing access to medical care, not giving these companies and providers the right to discriminate and opt out.

Have you read the actual bill?

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by fishon

I’m not horrified. Sounds good to me.

So if you have a medical emergency, you're okay with the doctor saying "sorry but you offend me, my god is against [insert some feature you have, such as eye color or height] so you'll just have to leave the hospital now. You are not welcome here."

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by John Mayes

Have you read the actual bill?

Don't be silly... Of course they haven't...

[CoachKandSportsguy]

Originally Posted by John Mayes

Have you read the actual bill?

Don't need to read a states' right bill to discuss the federal implications, when the feds funding is important to the survival of most hospitals.

but you I guess you didn't read nor understand the point of our post on the federal revenue implications of certain behaviors. . nor understand the complexities of the health care revenue landscape.

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by CoachKandSportsguy

paging @golfingeagles
paging @golfingeagles

needed in the legal library STAT!

Slow down peeps!
CMS reimbursements for all kinds of healthcare activities is a large part of the operating revenue of most hospitals. Part of that reimbursement is the participation in all the CMS requirements and programs

Emergency Medical Treatment & Labor Act (EMTALA) | CMS

EMTALA is one of them. A hospital with an emergency room and receiving medicare reimbursements, would be in violation and would risk jeopardizing their reimbursements and payments if they voluntarily turned away people for these arbitrary reasons. Most hospitals would not want to do that.

So, the effects of the little dictator are not currently clear in regards to different healthcare scenarios. Many hospital systems also have policies in place for health care workers to not work in areas which they have religious objections, such as an abortion clinic. However, a healthcare worker would not abstain from rending care in the case of the mother bleeding out afterwards. . .

So these statutes have just been past, and there will be time needed to determine if the governor is over reaching in his state's rights legislation.

advice from coachk who works with CMS, reimbursements, the state of MA and the electronic medical records system which is the basis for reporting and compliance.

and written by sportsguy

Silly facts...

[Trayderjoe]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

So if you have a medical emergency, you're okay with the doctor saying "sorry but you offend me, my god is against [insert some feature you have, such as eye color or height] so you'll just have to leave the hospital now. You are not welcome here."

Yeah……not true. The bill (link) includes: “ (6)REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE EMERGENCY MEDICAL TREATMENT.
This section may not be construed to override any requirement to provide emergency medical treatment in accordance with state law or the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, 42 U.S.C. s. 1395dd.”

Based upon reading this bill, it would appear to provide protection from HAVING to conduct gender altering surgery on minors for example, or HAVING to abort a fetus regardless of the period of gestation if there is a conscious based objection to those procedures.

The bill provides requirements for a health care provider’s notice and documentation of such objection; requiring health care providers to notify patients or potential patients seeking a specific health care service of any such objection BEFORE scheduling an appointment.

If the procedures are necessary due to a MEDICAL EMERGENCY, then circle back to the medical emergency requirement.

There will be those in the medical field who do not have a conscious objection and will perform such procedures since this bill does NOT BAN the procedures.

I remember a commercial when I was a kid about RIF. Remember it? RIF = Reading is Fundamental

[CoachKandSportsguy]

Originally Posted by Trayderjoe

Yeah……not true. The bill (link) includes: “ (6)REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE EMERGENCY MEDICAL TREATMENT.
This section may not be construed to override any requirement to provide emergency medical treatment in accordance with state law or the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, 42 U.S.C. s. 1395dd.”

Based upon reading this bill, it would appear to provide protection from HAVING to conduct gender altering surgery on minors for example, or HAVING to abort a fetus regardless of the period of gestation if there is a conscious based objection to those procedures.

The bill provides requirements for a health care provider’s notice and documentation of such objection; requiring health care providers to notify patients or potential patients seeking a specific health care service of any such objection BEFORE scheduling an appointment.

If the procedures are necessary due to a MEDICAL EMERGENCY, then circle back to the medical emergency requirement.

There will be those in the medical field who do not have a conscious objection and will perform such procedures since this bill does NOT BAN the procedures.

I remember a commercial when I was a kid about RIF. Remember it? RIF = Reading is Fundamental

Its always very considerate and helpful to post the actual link, especially when headlines and advertising selling MSM, whose job is to sell advertisements or page reads, and to provide an accurate summary

Thank you!

[Toymeister]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

So if you have a medical emergency, you're okay with the doctor saying "sorry but you offend me, my god is against [insert some feature you have, such as eye color or height] so you'll just have to leave the hospital now. You are not welcome here."

Have you read the actual bill?

[Pairadocs]

Originally Posted by fishon

I’m not horrified. Sounds good to me.

Agree ! Not a "political" animal in regard to one party or the other, but I am a staunch supporter of our democratic republic (not a democracy), so would hate to see that kind of forcing of people, be they Muslims, Christians, Jews, or Buddhists to do things during the performance of their professions that causes them of loose their moral base. If a pharmacist refuses to fill a birth control Rx (don't know why, perhaps they are Catholic ?) I am sure there must be other pharmacists near enough that the customer would not be put out to any extent ! If a paramedic is a Christian scientist who happens to not believe in blood transfusions, I would not loose any sleep over worrying that if I needed blood at the scene of an accident there would not be an individual who was able to perform that procedure without personal guilt. I do NOT want to live in a country where people loose their jobs, or are FORCED to perform any acts that break their sacred spiritual bond with their God, who ever they may be.

[RayMan]

Originally Posted by Boomer

“Healthcare at Risk”? This hate-based horror, including misogyny, goes well beyond the potential for risk.

So life and death decisions can now be based on nothing more than the subjectivity of anyone working at any level of healthcare?

This looks to me like it grants a “License to Kill.”

Hmmm, for those who jump on this law’s bandwagon, ya know…..there could be some working in healthcare who decide it’s time for old, white people in the hospital to go see Jesus….

Think! Please think!

Boomer

True...this works both ways... The LGBTQ community or any others denied healthcare can start doing the same to the old, white, ignorant, hateful people. Live and Let Live!!

[banjobob]

The vast majority of doctors, emt’s and nurses do not care if you are a pervert or straight their goal is to help you, your comments seem to be just to create discord. So many laws are never enforced .

[huge-pigeons]

Of course the OP didn’t read the bill. They heard an interpretation of it on fake news and wanted to promote the false news.

[Worldseries27]

Originally Posted by jmintzer

don't be silly... Of course they haven't...

just like the one's who voted it into law because the party whip told them to.

[Ellwoodrick]

There is always a price for freedom. Just as you may have the freedom to post your opinion on any given topic. You do not have to agree with the persons post or opinion but we are free to do so. No one should be legislated to go against their beliefs. Compassion should trump discrimination. We are far from Utopia but it is the best system around.

Originally Posted by mickey100

A bill was was recently signed into law by the governor of Florida which states healthcare professionals, including insurance companies, can't be forced to violate their religious and moral/conscience convictions in order to treat a patient. Florida healthcare can now be denied based on moral, ethical, or religious beliefs.Its not just doctors, its ambulance drivers, hospitals, nurses, insurance companies, etc. So a pharmacist could refuse to fill a prescription for birth control. A doctor or nurse could refuse to help deliver the baby of a single woman, due to her lifestyle choice. An ambulance driver could refuse to pick up a gay person with Aids. The law is extremely discriminatory against LGBTQ people. A gay person in a nursing home could find themselves at risk of losing health care services, for example. I find this absolutely horrifying that it is now legal in Florida for doctors and other health care professionals to deny health care to anyone simply because they feel like it. We should be increasing access to medical care, not giving these companies and providers the right to discriminate and opt out.

This thread would not last long in a world of equality. It is infraction clickbait for those who love G D and it is FULL OF misinformation!! If this post is allowed to gain momentum it will solely be to increase ad algorithms n $$ for TOTV.