States, religious groups sue HHS over transgender treatment requirements
P
July 15, 2016: Surgeon Dr. Adam Tobias, far right, and Harvard Medical School residents Justin Cohen and Joani Christensen performing a bilateral mastectomy on EJ Silverberg at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. (AP)
Five states, joined by Christian health care providers, have filed a lawsuit challenging the Obama administration over new federal rules they say could force doctors to perform gender-transition procedures that violate their religious beliefs or medical judgment.
Texas, Wisconsin, Kentucky, Nebraska, and Kansas filed the suit at a Texas federal court last Tuesday, along with the Christian Medical and Dental Association and the Franciscan Alliance – a network of religious hospitals.
The lawsuit claims that nondiscrimination rules issued by the Department of Health and Human Services in May would force doctors to ignore their medical judgment in favor of “rigid commands.” The lawsuit claims doctors could be forced to perform procedures such as gender-reassignment surgery and hysterectomies.
“On pain of significant financial liability, the regulation forces doctors to perform controversial and sometimes harmful medical procedures ostensibly designed to permanently change an individual’s sex—including the sex of children,” the lawsuit says.
According to The Wall Street Journal, the rules require insurers to cover treatments for transgendered patients that they would cover for others and ban discrimination based on gender identity. Health care providers are required to provide treatment, and must also allow patients to use facilities that align with their gender identity. The rules apply to all medical systems that receive federal money.
“The regulation leaves doctors and hospitals in a very difficult position,” Luke Goodrich, a lawyer for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty which filed the suit, told the Journal.
Transgender rights advocates dismiss the complaint as a far-fetched hypothetical, saying transgender patients would not approach a doctor who lacked experience and expertise. They say the rules are necessary in order to make sure transgender patients have access to basic care and aren’t discriminated against.
"The only thing a doctor is obliged to do is treat all patients, including trans patients, with dignity and respect and to make treatment decisions free from bias," Jillian Weiss, executive director of the Transgender Legal Defense and Education Fund, told The Associated Press. "If a doctor has a sound, evidence-based, medical reason to delay transition care for a specific patient, that would be respected under the regulations."
The lawsuit is the second in recent months in which conservative states have sought to push back against the Obama administration’s efforts to strengthen transgender rights.
A federal judge on Aug. 21 temporarily blocked the Obama administration’s directive that school children be allowed to use bathrooms and other facilities that align with their gender identity regardless of biological gender, after 13 states and agencies challenged the order.States, religious groups sue HHS over transgender treatment requirements
Published August 29, 2016 FoxNews.com
Facebook Twitter livefyre Email Print
July 15, 2016: Surgeon Dr. Adam Tobias, far right, and Harvard Medical School residents Justin Cohen and Joani Christensen performing a bilateral mastectomy on EJ Silverberg at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.
July 15, 2016: Surgeon Dr. Adam Tobias, far right, and Harvard Medical School residents Justin Cohen and Joani Christensen performing a bilateral mastectomy on EJ Silverberg at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. (AP)
Five states, joined by Christian health care providers, have filed a lawsuit challenging the Obama administration over new federal rules they say could force doctors to perform gender-transition procedures that violate their religious beliefs or medical judgment.
Texas, Wisconsin, Kentucky, Nebraska, and Kansas filed the suit at a Texas federal court last Tuesday, along with the Christian Medical and Dental Association and the Franciscan Alliance – a network of religious hospitals.
The lawsuit claims that nondiscrimination rules issued by the Department of Health and Human Services in May would force doctors to ignore their medical judgment in favor of “rigid commands.” The lawsuit claims doctors could be forced to perform procedures such as gender-reassignment surgery and hysterectomies.
“On pain of significant financial liability, the regulation forces doctors to perform controversial and sometimes harmful medical procedures ostensibly designed to permanently change an individual’s sex—including the sex of children,” the lawsuit says.
According to The Wall Street Journal, the rules require insurers to cover treatments for transgendered patients that they would cover for others and ban discrimination based on gender identity. Health care providers are required to provide treatment, and must also allow patients to use facilities that align with their gender identity. The rules apply to all medical systems that receive federal money.
“The regulation leaves doctors and hospitals in a very difficult position,” Luke Goodrich, a lawyer for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty which filed the suit, told the Journal.
Transgender rights advocates dismiss the complaint as a far-fetched hypothetical, saying transgender patients would not approach a doctor who lacked experience and expertise. They say the rules are necessary in order to make sure transgender patients have access to basic care and aren’t discriminated against.
"The only thing a doctor is obliged to do is treat all patients, including trans patients, with dignity and respect and to make treatment decisions free from bias," Jillian Weiss, executive director of the Transgender Legal Defense and Education Fund, told The Associated Press. "If a doctor has a sound, evidence-based, medical reason to delay transition care for a specific patient, that would be respected under the regulations."
The lawsuit is the second in recent months in which conservative states have sought to push back against the Obama administration’s efforts to strengthen transgender rights.
A federal judge on Aug. 21 temporarily blocked the Obama administration’s directive that school children be allowed to use bathrooms and other facilities that align with their gender identity regardless of biological gender, after 13 states and agencies challenged the order.
no propaganda please wrote:
States, religious groups sue HHS over transgender treatment requirements
P
July 15, 2016: Surgeon Dr. Adam Tobias, far right, and Harvard Medical School residents Justin Cohen and Joani Christensen performing a bilateral mastectomy on EJ Silverberg at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. (AP)
Five states, joined by Christian health care providers, have filed a lawsuit challenging the Obama administration over new federal rules they say could force doctors to perform gender-transition procedures that violate their religious beliefs or medical judgment.
Texas, Wisconsin, Kentucky, Nebraska, and Kansas filed the suit at a Texas federal court last Tuesday, along with the Christian Medical and Dental Association and the Franciscan Alliance – a network of religious hospitals.
The lawsuit claims that nondiscrimination rules issued by the Department of Health and Human Services in May would force doctors to ignore their medical judgment in favor of “rigid commands.” The lawsuit claims doctors could be forced to perform procedures such as gender-reassignment surgery and hysterectomies.
“On pain of significant financial liability, the regulation forces doctors to perform controversial and sometimes harmful medical procedures ostensibly designed to permanently change an individual’s sex—including the sex of children,” the lawsuit says.
According to The Wall Street Journal, the rules require insurers to cover treatments for transgendered patients that they would cover for others and ban discrimination based on gender identity. Health care providers are required to provide treatment, and must also allow patients to use facilities that align with their gender identity. The rules apply to all medical systems that receive federal money.
“The regulation leaves doctors and hospitals in a very difficult position,” Luke Goodrich, a lawyer for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty which filed the suit, told the Journal.
Transgender rights advocates dismiss the complaint as a far-fetched hypothetical, saying transgender patients would not approach a doctor who lacked experience and expertise. They say the rules are necessary in order to make sure transgender patients have access to basic care and aren’t discriminated against.
"The only thing a doctor is obliged to do is treat all patients, including trans patients, with dignity and respect and to make treatment decisions free from bias," Jillian Weiss, executive director of the Transgender Legal Defense and Education Fund, told The Associated Press. "If a doctor has a sound, evidence-based, medical reason to delay transition care for a specific patient, that would be respected under the regulations."
The lawsuit is the second in recent months in which conservative states have sought to push back against the Obama administration’s efforts to strengthen transgender rights.
A federal judge on Aug. 21 temporarily blocked the Obama administration’s directive that school children be allowed to use bathrooms and other facilities that align with their gender identity regardless of biological gender, after 13 states and agencies challenged the order.States, religious groups sue HHS over transgender treatment requirements
Published August 29, 2016 FoxNews.com
Facebook Twitter livefyre Email Print
July 15, 2016: Surgeon Dr. Adam Tobias, far right, and Harvard Medical School residents Justin Cohen and Joani Christensen performing a bilateral mastectomy on EJ Silverberg at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.
July 15, 2016: Surgeon Dr. Adam Tobias, far right, and Harvard Medical School residents Justin Cohen and Joani Christensen performing a bilateral mastectomy on EJ Silverberg at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. (AP)
Five states, joined by Christian health care providers, have filed a lawsuit challenging the Obama administration over new federal rules they say could force doctors to perform gender-transition procedures that violate their religious beliefs or medical judgment.
Texas, Wisconsin, Kentucky, Nebraska, and Kansas filed the suit at a Texas federal court last Tuesday, along with the Christian Medical and Dental Association and the Franciscan Alliance – a network of religious hospitals.
The lawsuit claims that nondiscrimination rules issued by the Department of Health and Human Services in May would force doctors to ignore their medical judgment in favor of “rigid commands.” The lawsuit claims doctors could be forced to perform procedures such as gender-reassignment surgery and hysterectomies.
“On pain of significant financial liability, the regulation forces doctors to perform controversial and sometimes harmful medical procedures ostensibly designed to permanently change an individual’s sex—including the sex of children,” the lawsuit says.
According to The Wall Street Journal, the rules require insurers to cover treatments for transgendered patients that they would cover for others and ban discrimination based on gender identity. Health care providers are required to provide treatment, and must also allow patients to use facilities that align with their gender identity. The rules apply to all medical systems that receive federal money.
“The regulation leaves doctors and hospitals in a very difficult position,” Luke Goodrich, a lawyer for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty which filed the suit, told the Journal.
Transgender rights advocates dismiss the complaint as a far-fetched hypothetical, saying transgender patients would not approach a doctor who lacked experience and expertise. They say the rules are necessary in order to make sure transgender patients have access to basic care and aren’t discriminated against.
"The only thing a doctor is obliged to do is treat all patients, including trans patients, with dignity and respect and to make treatment decisions free from bias," Jillian Weiss, executive director of the Transgender Legal Defense and Education Fund, told The Associated Press. "If a doctor has a sound, evidence-based, medical reason to delay transition care for a specific patient, that would be respected under the regulations."
The lawsuit is the second in recent months in which conservative states have sought to push back against the Obama administration’s efforts to strengthen transgender rights.
A federal judge on Aug. 21 temporarily blocked the Obama administration’s directive that school children be allowed to use bathrooms and other facilities that align with their gender identity regardless of biological gender, after 13 states and agencies challenged the order.
States, religious groups sue HHS over transgender ... (
show quote)
Mixing politics and medicine is never a good idea. Letting legislatures determine medical practice is an even worse idea, yet we have allowed it for years and years. There should be laws related to criminal malpractice and setting tort limits, but standards of care and practice should be separated from legislative bodies - like it used to be. Currently, each State is responsible for setting standards of care and practice and these change from State to State. Forced sterilization of mentally handicapped children may be standard in one State, but not another, and similar differences can be found for most practices. This is inherently insane.
There are no National standards for Medical or Nursing schools. There are even two different standards for CPR, as you may cling to the Red Cross method or that of the AHA. Be that as it may, where do legislators, who tend to be lawyers, get their expertise to set medical practices? Sure, most claim to be advised by their States Medical Board - but who appoints IT'S members?
Federal and State Governments need to stay the hell out of the Doctors office, unless and until a crime has been committed. I feel the same way about health insurance company actuary's and lawyers. Let the American Medical Association set standards for ALL Doctors, the National Nurses Association set standards for ALL Nurses, etc. - and we can end these ridiculous conversations once and for all.
lpnmajor wrote:
Mixing politics and medicine is never a good idea. Letting legislatures determine medical practice is an even worse idea, yet we have allowed it for years and years. There should be laws related to criminal malpractice and setting tort limits, but standards of care and practice should be separated from legislative bodies - like it used to be. Currently, each State is responsible for setting standards of care and practice and these change from State to State. Forced sterilization of mentally handicapped children may be standard in one State, but not another, and similar differences can be found for most practices. This is inherently insane.
There are no National standards for Medical or Nursing schools. There are even two different standards for CPR, as you may cling to the Red Cross method or that of the AHA. Be that as it may, where do legislators, who tend to be lawyers, get their expertise to set medical practices? Sure, most claim to be advised by their States Medical Board - but who appoints IT'S members?
Federal and State Governments need to stay the hell out of the Doctors office, unless and until a crime has been committed. I feel the same way about health insurance company actuary's and lawyers. Let the American Medical Association set standards for ALL Doctors, the National Nurses Association set standards for ALL Nurses, etc. - and we can end these ridiculous conversations once and for all.
Mixing politics and medicine is never a good idea.... (
show quote)
Some very good points. thank you so much for your input.
lpnmajor wrote:
Mixing politics and medicine is never a good idea. Letting legislatures determine medical practice is an even worse idea, yet we have allowed it for years and years. There should be laws related to criminal malpractice and setting tort limits, but standards of care and practice should be separated from legislative bodies - like it used to be. Currently, each State is responsible for setting standards of care and practice and these change from State to State. Forced sterilization of mentally handicapped children may be standard in one State, but not another, and similar differences can be found for most practices. This is inherently insane.
There are no National standards for Medical or Nursing schools. There are even two different standards for CPR, as you may cling to the Red Cross method or that of the AHA. Be that as it may, where do legislators, who tend to be lawyers, get their expertise to set medical practices? Sure, most claim to be advised by their States Medical Board - but who appoints IT'S members?
Federal and State Governments need to stay the hell out of the Doctors office, unless and until a crime has been committed. I feel the same way about health insurance company actuary's and lawyers. Let the American Medical Association set standards for ALL Doctors, the National Nurses Association set standards for ALL Nurses, etc. - and we can end these ridiculous conversations once and for all.
Mixing politics and medicine is never a good idea.... (
show quote)
By using the insurance industry as the primary advisor, the left allowed an act to be written that includes many "gadget plays" enabling the carrier's to raise pricings, exclude protocols/procedures, and drop out altogether without.penalty. in short, the industry "tailor made" the cat for its own purposes and patient care was not a factor.
Docadhoc wrote:
By using the insurance industry as the primary advisor, the left allowed an act to be written that includes many "gadget plays" enabling the carrier's to raise pricings, exclude protocols/procedures, and drop out altogether without.penalty. in short, the industry "tailor made" the cat for its own purposes and patient care was not a factor.
If legislators are disallowed to dabble in healthcare, the pharmaceutical, hospital, insurance and medical equipment lobby's will have to go elsewhere to find someone to bribe.
I wonder what would have happened to Mylan, if every insurance carrier simply refused to pay the inflated price for Epi-Pens?
no propaganda please wrote:
States, religious groups sue HHS over transgender treatment requirements
P
July 15, 2016: Surgeon Dr. Adam Tobias, far right, and Harvard Medical School residents Justin Cohen and Joani Christensen performing a bilateral mastectomy on EJ Silverberg at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. (AP)
Five states, joined by Christian health care providers, have filed a lawsuit challenging the Obama administration over new federal rules they say could force doctors to perform gender-transition procedures that violate their religious beliefs or medical judgment.
Texas, Wisconsin, Kentucky, Nebraska, and Kansas filed the suit at a Texas federal court last Tuesday, along with the Christian Medical and Dental Association and the Franciscan Alliance – a network of religious hospitals.
The lawsuit claims that nondiscrimination rules issued by the Department of Health and Human Services in May would force doctors to ignore their medical judgment in favor of “rigid commands.” The lawsuit claims doctors could be forced to perform procedures such as gender-reassignment surgery and hysterectomies.
“On pain of significant financial liability, the regulation forces doctors to perform controversial and sometimes harmful medical procedures ostensibly designed to permanently change an individual’s sex—including the sex of children,” the lawsuit says.
According to The Wall Street Journal, the rules require insurers to cover treatments for transgendered patients that they would cover for others and ban discrimination based on gender identity. Health care providers are required to provide treatment, and must also allow patients to use facilities that align with their gender identity. The rules apply to all medical systems that receive federal money.
“The regulation leaves doctors and hospitals in a very difficult position,” Luke Goodrich, a lawyer for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty which filed the suit, told the Journal.
Transgender rights advocates dismiss the complaint as a far-fetched hypothetical, saying transgender patients would not approach a doctor who lacked experience and expertise. They say the rules are necessary in order to make sure transgender patients have access to basic care and aren’t discriminated against.
"The only thing a doctor is obliged to do is treat all patients, including trans patients, with dignity and respect and to make treatment decisions free from bias," Jillian Weiss, executive director of the Transgender Legal Defense and Education Fund, told The Associated Press. "If a doctor has a sound, evidence-based, medical reason to delay transition care for a specific patient, that would be respected under the regulations."
The lawsuit is the second in recent months in which conservative states have sought to push back against the Obama administration’s efforts to strengthen transgender rights.
A federal judge on Aug. 21 temporarily blocked the Obama administration’s directive that school children be allowed to use bathrooms and other facilities that align with their gender identity regardless of biological gender, after 13 states and agencies challenged the order.States, religious groups sue HHS over transgender treatment requirements
Published August 29, 2016 FoxNews.com
Facebook Twitter livefyre Email Print
July 15, 2016: Surgeon Dr. Adam Tobias, far right, and Harvard Medical School residents Justin Cohen and Joani Christensen performing a bilateral mastectomy on EJ Silverberg at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.
July 15, 2016: Surgeon Dr. Adam Tobias, far right, and Harvard Medical School residents Justin Cohen and Joani Christensen performing a bilateral mastectomy on EJ Silverberg at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. (AP)
Five states, joined by Christian health care providers, have filed a lawsuit challenging the Obama administration over new federal rules they say could force doctors to perform gender-transition procedures that violate their religious beliefs or medical judgment.
Texas, Wisconsin, Kentucky, Nebraska, and Kansas filed the suit at a Texas federal court last Tuesday, along with the Christian Medical and Dental Association and the Franciscan Alliance – a network of religious hospitals.
The lawsuit claims that nondiscrimination rules issued by the Department of Health and Human Services in May would force doctors to ignore their medical judgment in favor of “rigid commands.” The lawsuit claims doctors could be forced to perform procedures such as gender-reassignment surgery and hysterectomies.
“On pain of significant financial liability, the regulation forces doctors to perform controversial and sometimes harmful medical procedures ostensibly designed to permanently change an individual’s sex—including the sex of children,” the lawsuit says.
According to The Wall Street Journal, the rules require insurers to cover treatments for transgendered patients that they would cover for others and ban discrimination based on gender identity. Health care providers are required to provide treatment, and must also allow patients to use facilities that align with their gender identity. The rules apply to all medical systems that receive federal money.
“The regulation leaves doctors and hospitals in a very difficult position,” Luke Goodrich, a lawyer for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty which filed the suit, told the Journal.
Transgender rights advocates dismiss the complaint as a far-fetched hypothetical, saying transgender patients would not approach a doctor who lacked experience and expertise. They say the rules are necessary in order to make sure transgender patients have access to basic care and aren’t discriminated against.
"The only thing a doctor is obliged to do is treat all patients, including trans patients, with dignity and respect and to make treatment decisions free from bias," Jillian Weiss, executive director of the Transgender Legal Defense and Education Fund, told The Associated Press. "If a doctor has a sound, evidence-based, medical reason to delay transition care for a specific patient, that would be respected under the regulations."
The lawsuit is the second in recent months in which conservative states have sought to push back against the Obama administration’s efforts to strengthen transgender rights.
A federal judge on Aug. 21 temporarily blocked the Obama administration’s directive that school children be allowed to use bathrooms and other facilities that align with their gender identity regardless of biological gender, after 13 states and agencies challenged the order.
States, religious groups sue HHS over transgender ... (
show quote)
Given the previous rulings of the SCOTUS on Religion or religious issues, if it violates their religious beliefs they do not have to acquiesce....
While the correct ruling, it is also becoming the Catch all in theory to by pass laws people just are not comfortable with and no one can make the person, organization etc do what they object to ...
So, It won't happen in the end, npp..
Also given the risks involved for such a transition of numerous surgical intervention the Dr may well be concerned with Malpractice and refuse it given his sound judgement that the person may not be healthy enough, emotionally or physically and will not nor can it be challenged either..
This isn't a communistic nation yet!..
lpnmajor wrote:
Mixing politics and medicine is never a good idea. Letting legislatures determine medical practice is an even worse idea, yet we have allowed it for years and years. There should be laws related to criminal malpractice and setting tort limits, but standards of care and practice should be separated from legislative bodies - like it used to be. Currently, each State is responsible for setting standards of care and practice and these change from State to State. Forced sterilization of mentally handicapped children may be standard in one State, but not another, and similar differences can be found for most practices. This is inherently insane.
There are no National standards for Medical or Nursing schools. There are even two different standards for CPR, as you may cling to the Red Cross method or that of the AHA. Be that as it may, where do legislators, who tend to be lawyers, get their expertise to set medical practices? Sure, most claim to be advised by their States Medical Board - but who appoints IT'S members?
Federal and State Governments need to stay the hell out of the Doctors office, unless and until a crime has been committed. I feel the same way about health insurance company actuary's and lawyers. Let the American Medical Association set standards for ALL Doctors, the National Nurses Association set standards for ALL Nurses, etc. - and we can end these ridiculous conversations once and for all.
Mixing politics and medicine is never a good idea.... (
show quote)
Agree, well said, major...
no propaganda please wrote:
States, religious groups sue HHS over transgender treatment requirements
P
July 15, 2016: Surgeon Dr. Adam Tobias, far right, and Harvard Medical School residents Justin Cohen and Joani Christensen performing a bilateral mastectomy on EJ Silverberg at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. (AP)
Five states, joined by Christian health care providers, have filed a lawsuit challenging the Obama administration over new federal rules they say could force doctors to perform gender-transition procedures that violate their religious beliefs or medical judgment.
Texas, Wisconsin, Kentucky, Nebraska, and Kansas filed the suit at a Texas federal court last Tuesday, along with the Christian Medical and Dental Association and the Franciscan Alliance – a network of religious hospitals.
The lawsuit claims that nondiscrimination rules issued by the Department of Health and Human Services in May would force doctors to ignore their medical judgment in favor of “rigid commands.” The lawsuit claims doctors could be forced to perform procedures such as gender-reassignment surgery and hysterectomies.
“On pain of significant financial liability, the regulation forces doctors to perform controversial and sometimes harmful medical procedures ostensibly designed to permanently change an individual’s sex—including the sex of children,” the lawsuit says.
According to The Wall Street Journal, the rules require insurers to cover treatments for transgendered patients that they would cover for others and ban discrimination based on gender identity. Health care providers are required to provide treatment, and must also allow patients to use facilities that align with their gender identity. The rules apply to all medical systems that receive federal money.
“The regulation leaves doctors and hospitals in a very difficult position,” Luke Goodrich, a lawyer for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty which filed the suit, told the Journal.
Transgender rights advocates dismiss the complaint as a far-fetched hypothetical, saying transgender patients would not approach a doctor who lacked experience and expertise. They say the rules are necessary in order to make sure transgender patients have access to basic care and aren’t discriminated against.
"The only thing a doctor is obliged to do is treat all patients, including trans patients, with dignity and respect and to make treatment decisions free from bias," Jillian Weiss, executive director of the Transgender Legal Defense and Education Fund, told The Associated Press. "If a doctor has a sound, evidence-based, medical reason to delay transition care for a specific patient, that would be respected under the regulations."
The lawsuit is the second in recent months in which conservative states have sought to push back against the Obama administration’s efforts to strengthen transgender rights.
A federal judge on Aug. 21 temporarily blocked the Obama administration’s directive that school children be allowed to use bathrooms and other facilities that align with their gender identity regardless of biological gender, after 13 states and agencies challenged the order.States, religious groups sue HHS over transgender treatment requirements
Published August 29, 2016 FoxNews.com
Facebook Twitter livefyre Email Print
July 15, 2016: Surgeon Dr. Adam Tobias, far right, and Harvard Medical School residents Justin Cohen and Joani Christensen performing a bilateral mastectomy on EJ Silverberg at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.
July 15, 2016: Surgeon Dr. Adam Tobias, far right, and Harvard Medical School residents Justin Cohen and Joani Christensen performing a bilateral mastectomy on EJ Silverberg at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. (AP)
Five states, joined by Christian health care providers, have filed a lawsuit challenging the Obama administration over new federal rules they say could force doctors to perform gender-transition procedures that violate their religious beliefs or medical judgment.
Texas, Wisconsin, Kentucky, Nebraska, and Kansas filed the suit at a Texas federal court last Tuesday, along with the Christian Medical and Dental Association and the Franciscan Alliance – a network of religious hospitals.
The lawsuit claims that nondiscrimination rules issued by the Department of Health and Human Services in May would force doctors to ignore their medical judgment in favor of “rigid commands.” The lawsuit claims doctors could be forced to perform procedures such as gender-reassignment surgery and hysterectomies.
“On pain of significant financial liability, the regulation forces doctors to perform controversial and sometimes harmful medical procedures ostensibly designed to permanently change an individual’s sex—including the sex of children,” the lawsuit says.
According to The Wall Street Journal, the rules require insurers to cover treatments for transgendered patients that they would cover for others and ban discrimination based on gender identity. Health care providers are required to provide treatment, and must also allow patients to use facilities that align with their gender identity. The rules apply to all medical systems that receive federal money.
“The regulation leaves doctors and hospitals in a very difficult position,” Luke Goodrich, a lawyer for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty which filed the suit, told the Journal.
Transgender rights advocates dismiss the complaint as a far-fetched hypothetical, saying transgender patients would not approach a doctor who lacked experience and expertise. They say the rules are necessary in order to make sure transgender patients have access to basic care and aren’t discriminated against.
"The only thing a doctor is obliged to do is treat all patients, including trans patients, with dignity and respect and to make treatment decisions free from bias," Jillian Weiss, executive director of the Transgender Legal Defense and Education Fund, told The Associated Press. "If a doctor has a sound, evidence-based, medical reason to delay transition care for a specific patient, that would be respected under the regulations."
The lawsuit is the second in recent months in which conservative states have sought to push back against the Obama administration’s efforts to strengthen transgender rights.
A federal judge on Aug. 21 temporarily blocked the Obama administration’s directive that school children be allowed to use bathrooms and other facilities that align with their gender identity regardless of biological gender, after 13 states and agencies challenged the order.
States, religious groups sue HHS over transgender ... (
show quote)
A child should never have this done. let them make this choice when they are adults. I think a lot of this bs is coming from the parents and they should be looked into very closely
no propaganda please wrote:
States, religious groups sue HHS over transgender treatment requirements
P
July 15, 2016: Surgeon Dr. Adam Tobias, far right, and Harvard Medical School residents Justin Cohen and Joani Christensen performing a bilateral mastectomy on EJ Silverberg at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. (AP)
Five states, joined by Christian health care providers, have filed a lawsuit challenging the Obama administration over new federal rules they say could force doctors to perform gender-transition procedures that violate their religious beliefs or medical judgment.
Texas, Wisconsin, Kentucky, Nebraska, and Kansas filed the suit at a Texas federal court last Tuesday, along with the Christian Medical and Dental Association and the Franciscan Alliance – a network of religious hospitals.
The lawsuit claims that nondiscrimination rules issued by the Department of Health and Human Services in May would force doctors to ignore their medical judgment in favor of “rigid commands.” The lawsuit claims doctors could be forced to perform procedures such as gender-reassignment surgery and hysterectomies.
“On pain of significant financial liability, the regulation forces doctors to perform controversial and sometimes harmful medical procedures ostensibly designed to permanently change an individual’s sex—including the sex of children,” the lawsuit says.
According to The Wall Street Journal, the rules require insurers to cover treatments for transgendered patients that they would cover for others and ban discrimination based on gender identity. Health care providers are required to provide treatment, and must also allow patients to use facilities that align with their gender identity. The rules apply to all medical systems that receive federal money.
“The regulation leaves doctors and hospitals in a very difficult position,” Luke Goodrich, a lawyer for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty which filed the suit, told the Journal.
Transgender rights advocates dismiss the complaint as a far-fetched hypothetical, saying transgender patients would not approach a doctor who lacked experience and expertise. They say the rules are necessary in order to make sure transgender patients have access to basic care and aren’t discriminated against.
"The only thing a doctor is obliged to do is treat all patients, including trans patients, with dignity and respect and to make treatment decisions free from bias," Jillian Weiss, executive director of the Transgender Legal Defense and Education Fund, told The Associated Press. "If a doctor has a sound, evidence-based, medical reason to delay transition care for a specific patient, that would be respected under the regulations."
The lawsuit is the second in recent months in which conservative states have sought to push back against the Obama administration’s efforts to strengthen transgender rights.
A federal judge on Aug. 21 temporarily blocked the Obama administration’s directive that school children be allowed to use bathrooms and other facilities that align with their gender identity regardless of biological gender, after 13 states and agencies challenged the order.States, religious groups sue HHS over transgender treatment requirements
Published August 29, 2016 FoxNews.com
Facebook Twitter livefyre Email Print
July 15, 2016: Surgeon Dr. Adam Tobias, far right, and Harvard Medical School residents Justin Cohen and Joani Christensen performing a bilateral mastectomy on EJ Silverberg at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.
July 15, 2016: Surgeon Dr. Adam Tobias, far right, and Harvard Medical School residents Justin Cohen and Joani Christensen performing a bilateral mastectomy on EJ Silverberg at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. (AP)
Five states, joined by Christian health care providers, have filed a lawsuit challenging the Obama administration over new federal rules they say could force doctors to perform gender-transition procedures that violate their religious beliefs or medical judgment.
Texas, Wisconsin, Kentucky, Nebraska, and Kansas filed the suit at a Texas federal court last Tuesday, along with the Christian Medical and Dental Association and the Franciscan Alliance – a network of religious hospitals.
The lawsuit claims that nondiscrimination rules issued by the Department of Health and Human Services in May would force doctors to ignore their medical judgment in favor of “rigid commands.” The lawsuit claims doctors could be forced to perform procedures such as gender-reassignment surgery and hysterectomies.
“On pain of significant financial liability, the regulation forces doctors to perform controversial and sometimes harmful medical procedures ostensibly designed to permanently change an individual’s sex—including the sex of children,” the lawsuit says.
According to The Wall Street Journal, the rules require insurers to cover treatments for transgendered patients that they would cover for others and ban discrimination based on gender identity. Health care providers are required to provide treatment, and must also allow patients to use facilities that align with their gender identity. The rules apply to all medical systems that receive federal money.
“The regulation leaves doctors and hospitals in a very difficult position,” Luke Goodrich, a lawyer for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty which filed the suit, told the Journal.
Transgender rights advocates dismiss the complaint as a far-fetched hypothetical, saying transgender patients would not approach a doctor who lacked experience and expertise. They say the rules are necessary in order to make sure transgender patients have access to basic care and aren’t discriminated against.
"The only thing a doctor is obliged to do is treat all patients, including trans patients, with dignity and respect and to make treatment decisions free from bias," Jillian Weiss, executive director of the Transgender Legal Defense and Education Fund, told The Associated Press. "If a doctor has a sound, evidence-based, medical reason to delay transition care for a specific patient, that would be respected under the regulations."
The lawsuit is the second in recent months in which conservative states have sought to push back against the Obama administration’s efforts to strengthen transgender rights.
A federal judge on Aug. 21 temporarily blocked the Obama administration’s directive that school children be allowed to use bathrooms and other facilities that align with their gender identity regardless of biological gender, after 13 states and agencies challenged the order.
States, religious groups sue HHS over transgender ... (
show quote)
The admission to medical school is not a right, it is a privilege conferred by the teaching institutions of our secular culture and society. If a student identifies an impediment to future practice of a significant magnitude, (A one handed person would have a significant amount of difficulty learning standard surgical techniques.) The school may pass on that applicant.
If a student identifies a religiously based impairment, the school may pass on
that applicant. How can a student who refuses to learn or experience an identified portion of a curriculum be certified as competent in the curriculum?
Do we make hematology optional for Jehovah's Witnesses, Saturday Conference optional for Sabbath observers, any material pertaining to the human female body optional for Muslims, genetic medicine optional for Creationists....
Our medical delivery system is atrocious enough already.
Christians are told upfront that to follow him is to take up a cross, to accept persecution and deny themselves privileges others are allowed.
This is such an example. Can't eat your cake and save it, too.
Edit: And if you claim the privilege of refusing to even bake a cake that would be used to celebrate a homosexual wedding why are you flirting with contamination by pursuing and endorsing and then sueing for the privilege to attain a
chosen profession which engages in such practices, endorces lifestyles such as homosexual and transgender as normal and life affirming, abortion as birth control, . . .
Have you seriously thought this through, guys?
no propaganda please wrote:
States, religious groups sue HHS over transgender treatment requirements
P
July 15, 2016: Surgeon Dr. Adam Tobias, far right, and Harvard Medical School residents Justin Cohen and Joani Christensen performing a bilateral mastectomy on EJ Silverberg at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. (AP)
Five states, joined by Christian health care providers, have filed a lawsuit challenging the Obama administration over new federal rules they say could force doctors to perform gender-transition procedures that violate their religious beliefs or medical judgment.
Texas, Wisconsin, Kentucky, Nebraska, and Kansas filed the suit at a Texas federal court last Tuesday, along with the Christian Medical and Dental Association and the Franciscan Alliance – a network of religious hospitals.
The lawsuit claims that nondiscrimination rules issued by the Department of Health and Human Services in May would force doctors to ignore their medical judgment in favor of “rigid commands.” The lawsuit claims doctors could be forced to perform procedures such as gender-reassignment surgery and hysterectomies.
“On pain of significant financial liability, the regulation forces doctors to perform controversial and sometimes harmful medical procedures ostensibly designed to permanently change an individual’s sex—including the sex of children,” the lawsuit says.
According to The Wall Street Journal, the rules require insurers to cover treatments for transgendered patients that they would cover for others and ban discrimination based on gender identity. Health care providers are required to provide treatment, and must also allow patients to use facilities that align with their gender identity. The rules apply to all medical systems that receive federal money.
“The regulation leaves doctors and hospitals in a very difficult position,” Luke Goodrich, a lawyer for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty which filed the suit, told the Journal.
Transgender rights advocates dismiss the complaint as a far-fetched hypothetical, saying transgender patients would not approach a doctor who lacked experience and expertise. They say the rules are necessary in order to make sure transgender patients have access to basic care and aren’t discriminated against.
"The only thing a doctor is obliged to do is treat all patients, including trans patients, with dignity and respect and to make treatment decisions free from bias," Jillian Weiss, executive director of the Transgender Legal Defense and Education Fund, told The Associated Press. "If a doctor has a sound, evidence-based, medical reason to delay transition care for a specific patient, that would be respected under the regulations."
The lawsuit is the second in recent months in which conservative states have sought to push back against the Obama administration’s efforts to strengthen transgender rights.
A federal judge on Aug. 21 temporarily blocked the Obama administration’s directive that school children be allowed to use bathrooms and other facilities that align with their gender identity regardless of biological gender, after 13 states and agencies challenged the order.States, religious groups sue HHS over transgender treatment requirements
Published August 29, 2016 FoxNews.com
Facebook Twitter livefyre Email Print
July 15, 2016: Surgeon Dr. Adam Tobias, far right, and Harvard Medical School residents Justin Cohen and Joani Christensen performing a bilateral mastectomy on EJ Silverberg at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.
July 15, 2016: Surgeon Dr. Adam Tobias, far right, and Harvard Medical School residents Justin Cohen and Joani Christensen performing a bilateral mastectomy on EJ Silverberg at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. (AP)
Five states, joined by Christian health care providers, have filed a lawsuit challenging the Obama administration over new federal rules they say could force doctors to perform gender-transition procedures that violate their religious beliefs or medical judgment.
Texas, Wisconsin, Kentucky, Nebraska, and Kansas filed the suit at a Texas federal court last Tuesday, along with the Christian Medical and Dental Association and the Franciscan Alliance – a network of religious hospitals.
The lawsuit claims that nondiscrimination rules issued by the Department of Health and Human Services in May would force doctors to ignore their medical judgment in favor of “rigid commands.” The lawsuit claims doctors could be forced to perform procedures such as gender-reassignment surgery and hysterectomies.
“On pain of significant financial liability, the regulation forces doctors to perform controversial and sometimes harmful medical procedures ostensibly designed to permanently change an individual’s sex—including the sex of children,” the lawsuit says.
According to The Wall Street Journal, the rules require insurers to cover treatments for transgendered patients that they would cover for others and ban discrimination based on gender identity. Health care providers are required to provide treatment, and must also allow patients to use facilities that align with their gender identity. The rules apply to all medical systems that receive federal money.
“The regulation leaves doctors and hospitals in a very difficult position,” Luke Goodrich, a lawyer for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty which filed the suit, told the Journal.
Transgender rights advocates dismiss the complaint as a far-fetched hypothetical, saying transgender patients would not approach a doctor who lacked experience and expertise. They say the rules are necessary in order to make sure transgender patients have access to basic care and aren’t discriminated against.
"The only thing a doctor is obliged to do is treat all patients, including trans patients, with dignity and respect and to make treatment decisions free from bias," Jillian Weiss, executive director of the Transgender Legal Defense and Education Fund, told The Associated Press. "If a doctor has a sound, evidence-based, medical reason to delay transition care for a specific patient, that would be respected under the regulations."
The lawsuit is the second in recent months in which conservative states have sought to push back against the Obama administration’s efforts to strengthen transgender rights.
A federal judge on Aug. 21 temporarily blocked the Obama administration’s directive that school children be allowed to use bathrooms and other facilities that align with their gender identity regardless of biological gender, after 13 states and agencies challenged the order.
States, religious groups sue HHS over transgender ... (
show quote)
NPP - This seems to me to be just another fear-mongering bunch of mis-information. It obviously applies to access to insurance coverage and not to doctors per se. Gender reassignment surgery is clearly a complicated, difficult and unique procedure. One would only turn to a doctor already skilled in that procedure, and I think we can safely say it was his/her choice to pursue such extensive additional specialization. No surgeon is being forced to perform sex reassignment surgery.
As to the header for your post, I am forced to do something I find unethical every April 15. I am forced to pay taxes to a government that uses some of my money to promulgate and fund war. If, as some say, at my death I must answer to a higher being for my sins, having been complicit in supporting war will be the top one on my list.
Further, my taxes are higher because there are a lot of tax-exempt organizations that are active in demonizing me and abrogating my civil rights. I certainly do not believe their work is ethical in the least, yet I am obliged to be pay my taxes anyway.
lpnmajor wrote:
Mixing politics and medicine is never a good idea. Letting legislatures determine medical practice is an even worse idea, yet we have allowed it for years and years. There should be laws related to criminal malpractice and setting tort limits, but standards of care and practice should be separated from legislative bodies - like it used to be. Currently, each State is responsible for setting standards of care and practice and these change from State to State. Forced sterilization of mentally handicapped children may be standard in one State, but not another, and similar differences can be found for most practices. This is inherently insane.
There are no National standards for Medical or Nursing schools. There are even two different standards for CPR, as you may cling to the Red Cross method or that of the AHA. Be that as it may, where do legislators, who tend to be lawyers, get their expertise to set medical practices? Sure, most claim to be advised by their States Medical Board - but who appoints IT'S members?
Federal and State Governments need to stay the hell out of the Doctors office, unless and until a crime has been committed. I feel the same way about health insurance company actuary's and lawyers. Let the American Medical Association set standards for ALL Doctors, the National Nurses Association set standards for ALL Nurses, etc. - and we can end these ridiculous conversations once and for all.
Mixing politics and medicine is never a good idea.... (
show quote)
It seems the demand to be doc's with difference is beginning to sound like, "Yeah, waitress, I want a ham sandwich! But instead of ham, I'll have a ground beef patty and instead of sliced bread, put it on a bun. Cheese? On a ham sandwich? It isn't kosher to mix meat and dairy!
PaulPisces wrote:
NPP - This seems to me to be just another fear-mongering bunch of mis-information. It obviously applies to access to insurance coverage and not to doctors per se. Gender reassignment surgery is clearly a complicated, difficult and unique procedure. One would only turn to a doctor already skilled in that procedure, and I think we can safely say it was his/her choice to pursue such extensive additional specialization. No surgeon is being forced to perform sex reassignment surgery.
As to the header for your post, I am forced to do something I find unethical every April 15. I am forced to pay taxes to a government that uses some of my money to promulgate and fund war. If, as some say, at my death I must answer to a higher being for my sins, having been complicit in supporting war will be the top one on my list.
Further, my taxes are higher because there are a lot of tax-exempt organizations that are active in demonizing me and abrogating my civil rights. I certainly do not believe their work is ethical in the least, yet I am obliged to be pay my taxes anyway.
NPP - This seems to me to be just another fear-mon... (
show quote)
And I am forced to pay taxes to fund abortions, provide services for thousands of illegal criminals who are in the country illegally and are on welfare, which is also illegal.
To suppose one can willy-nilly alter natural law has been a mainstay of the progressive movement since Trotsky, Marx, Stalin, et al.
The sex-assigned, genetically-determined, role reversal/change is the latest tool in the progressive shop. Not a new one... we've just started to 'allow' it.
I wonder: If progressives and their immoral medical personnel can claim the RIGHT to the power to alter Natural law, then could those very same individuals also declare themselves empowered (love that word, don't you?) as decider as to who should be killed off (like unwanted children in abortion) or maybe those who would be 'better off' in insane asylums?
Imagine being absconded because your hair texture does not meet 'their' criteria? Maybe your skin is too dark, too light? Eyes too brown, too blue?
Allowing or encouraging a select, elite, group to possess the power to claim the ability to alter natural law seems absolutely foolish, stupid, and, yes, dangerous to me.
The better-read in the crowd will recognize this *power over nature grab* as a cornerstone of the great and forever failing Utopian movements which always leads to socialism and finally, communism.
bggamers wrote:
A child should never have this done. let them make... (
show quote)
It wasn't rhat long ago that a parent subjecting their child to cosmetic surgery of this type would be arrested, tried, and convicted of child abuse and the child removed from the home permanently.
It was also a time when any surgeon I know would refuse the procedure and report the request to the proper authorities.
Singularity wrote:
The admission to medical school is not a right, it is a privilege conferred by the teaching institutions of our secular culture and society. If a student identifies an impediment to future practice of a significant magnitude, (A one handed person would have a significant amount of difficulty learning standard surgical techniques.) The school may pass on that applicant.
If a student identifies a religiously based impairment, the school may pass on that applicant. How can a student who refuses to learn or experience an identified portion of a curriculum be certified as competent in the curriculum?
Do we make hematology optional for Jehovah's Witnesses, Saturday Conference optional for Sabbath observers, any material pertaining to the human female body optional for Muslims, genetic medicine optional for Creationists....
Our medical delivery system is atrocious enough already.
Christians are told upfront that to follow him is to take up a cross, to accept persecution and deny themselves privileges others are allowed.
This is such an example. Can't eat your cake and save it, too.
Edit: And if you claim the privilege of refusing to even bake a cake that would be used to celebrate a homosexual wedding why are you flirting with contamination by pursuing and endorsing and then sueing for the privilege to attain a chosen profession which engages in such practices, endorces lifestyles such as homosexual and transgender as normal and life affirming, abortion as birth control, . . .
Have you seriously thought this through, guys?
The admission to medical school is not a right, it... (
show quote)
I don't buy any of it.
No Dr. can be held to task for refusing an elective procedure. Medically necessary treatment/procedures are another story but electives are.options only and can be and are refused daily. A mastectomy can be elective or medically necessary.
Think about plastic surgeons refusing patients. It happens every day.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
