So currently, if a patient was to go to the pharmacy inside of St. Joseph's hospital in Lexington they would not be able to get Plan B?

 

Assuming that the doctors and pharmacy personnel haven't taken it in their own hands to include Plan B on the shelves of their pharmacy in, this is correct. The Vatican, and more locally the US Conference of Catholic Bishops (who creates the guidelines for those who "write the rulebooks" for the Catholic hospitals) prohibits Plan B.

Another question I do not know the answer to:

 

A woman is delivering her baby. A serious issue occurs which puts the woman's life at risk and the solution is to terminate the pregnancy(for lack of a better phrase).

 

What are the doctors at St E to do? What are they allowed to do? Do they let the woman risk death ?

 

I'm not talking theoretically. I'm asking what they actually do today in these situations.

 

In this day and age, without anyone looking over their shoulders in all reality, this decision is virtually left to the doctor and the patient. I can only assume that if both are in disagreement with the church's stance, they terminate at childbirth.

No doubt the Catholic Church has a myriad of issues that need to be addressed. But just because it has other issues that need to be addressed, does not mean that they cannot oppose what they believe to be an unjust law. The key issue here is that Religious institutions are being forced to provide medical treatment that it as institution fundamentally opposes. Whether or not people who work at the hospitals agree with the church teachings is quite honestly inconsequential. My guess is that majority of those employee's are not Catholic to begin with. The KEY here is who is being forced to PAY for it, and whether or not this is a legally valid stipulation.

 

My guess is that the Bishops and the hierarchy of the church see this as a gateway to much greater interference from the government into what the Church believes are Religious decisions. Will this lead into a law requiring all companies pay for all Abortions? My guess is that the Church believes that to be the case.

 

Fair.

 

Although I'm still not sure by what I've read that ST E has to start providing abortions in their hospitals. All I've read is that their employees are required to have it covered should they pursue it.

 

IF it's the former then part of my argument is weakened and would be changed. If it's the latter then I would argue that the Church needs to do a better job with the flock.

In this day and age, without anyone looking over their shoulders in all reality, this decision is virtually left to the doctor and the patient. I can only assume that if both are in disagreement with the church's stance, they terminate at childbirth.

 

If you are correct how does the Church stand by and allow that to happen in one of their hospitals? Should they stand by and allow it to happen?

If you are correct how does the Church stand by and allow that to happen in one of their hospitals? Should they stand by and allow it to happen?

 

This isn't theoretical. The Church will say what it says, but when it comes to a life-and-death moment in an operating room, a doctor is going to make the call he deems best. I don't know how often this happens, so I can't say whether there are a whole lot of examples of what happens in that situation.

If you are correct how does the Church stand by and allow that to happen in one of their hospitals? Should they stand by and allow it to happen?

 

In response to your first question...it's an imperfect system. Plain and simple. 99.99% of Catholic hospital administrators are non-clergy, and I do not take vows of obedience to their bishops. I would wager to guess there are a large percentage of administrators in Catholic hospitals who are not Catholic.

 

If you ask me, if the USCCB and Catholic Church leaders wish to stand true to their convictions, they should most certainly NOT stand by and allow it to happen in their medical facilities.

This isn't theoretical. The Church will say what it says, but when it comes to a life-and-death moment in an operating room, a doctor is going to make the call he deems best. I don't know how often this happens, so I can't say whether there are a whole lot of examples of what happens in that situation.

 

Would it be inconsistent to allow a doctor to end the pregnancy in a case where the life of the mother was in peril but not to allow its employees to have contraceptives covered?

In response to your first question...it's an imperfect system. Plain and simple. 99.99% of Catholic hospital administrators are non-clergy, and I do not take vows of obedience to their bishops. I would wager to guess there are a large percentage of administrators in Catholic hospitals who are not Catholic.

 

If you ask me, if the USCCB and Catholic Church leaders wish to stand true to their convictions, they should most certainly NOT stand by and allow it to happen in their medical facilities.

 

I'm not sure if most Catholics would agree. I think most would vote to save the life of the mother.

The few external threats pale in comparison to the internal challenges within the Church. We've seen what lack of focus internally looks like and results in.

 

Disagree, I think when a government can force a religous organization to do something that goes against it's teachings, that's as big of a threat as there is. Once that gets started, where does it stop?

Would it be inconsistent to allow a doctor to end the pregnancy in a case where the life of the mother was in peril but not to allow its employees to have contraceptives covered?

 

Are you asking whether the Church would fire that doctor after the fact or whether the Church's policy before-hand is that no such terminations should take place?

No doubt the Catholic Church has a myriad of issues that need to be addressed. But just because it has other issues that need to be addressed, does not mean that they cannot oppose what they believe to be an unjust law. The key issue here is that Religious institutions are being forced to provide medical treatment that it as institution fundamentally opposes. Whether or not people who work at the hospitals agree with the church teachings is quite honestly inconsequential. My guess is that majority of those employee's are not Catholic to begin with. The KEY here is who is being forced to PAY for it, and whether or not this is a legally valid stipulation.

 

My guess is that the Bishops and the hierarchy of the church see this as a gateway to much greater interference from the government into what the Church believes are Religious decisions. Will this lead into a law requiring all companies pay for all Abortions? My guess is that the Church believes that to be the case.

 

That's the way I'm reading this issue.

I'm not sure if most Catholics would agree. I think most would vote to save the life of the mother.

 

I am one of the few who does not believe that just because "most" think one thing, then it should be so.

Not being familiar with either the inner workings of a hospital or the Catholic Church I've never really put much thought into what role the chuch plays in the running of a hospital. But now I'm left with lots of questions.

 

1. How much, if any funding do Catholic hospitals receive from the government?

2. How closely associated is the Church and the hospitals? I guess I always (maybe naively) assumed it was basically a naming thing and not much else.

3. Piggy-backing on #2, how much say does the Church have in policy making especially in regards to medical issues with the Catholic hospitals?

4. Is there any kind of "Catholic Docter Associaton" or something of similar ilk that strives to make medical decisions based on the Church's beliefs?

In this day and age, without anyone looking over their shoulders in all reality, this decision is virtually left to the doctor and the patient. I can only assume that if both are in disagreement with the church's stance, they terminate at childbirth.

Is the Church's official stance to proceed with the pregnancy and risk both lives?

Is the Church's official stance to proceed with the pregnancy and risk both lives?

 

The Church's official stance, were it to come down to it, would to be to save the child. The idea behind that being, very basically, that the mother has had opportunity at life and the child has not yet had that opportunity.