Ohioans will need information to combat ‘moral beliefs’ medical clause
Will the proponents of the clause inserted into Ohio’s two-year budget bill that would allow physicians, hospitals and health insurance companies to refuse to provide or pay for medical services on the grounds that it violates their moral beliefs (Monday “Ohio bill: Doctors could refuse care that violates religious beliefs”), specifically Sen. Terry Johnson, John Fortney (spokesperson for the Ohio Senate GOP), Aaron Baer (president of the Center for Christian Virtue), and Mike Gonidakis (president of Ohio Right to Life) also require these entities to identify – up front – all of the procedures that they intend to refuse to provide?
It seems appropriate, or else Ohioans of all faiths and beliefs will be playing a lethal game of roulette when it comes to picking a provider. Could these proponents be refused a blood transfusion because someone in the chain of their care is a Jehovah’s Witness? Could they be refused a vasectomy because some personnel in the chain of care is Catholic and opposed to birth control? Could they be refused a vaccine because, you know, some doctor and nurse has a deeply held moral belief in magnetism?
What if some medical provider – and I use the term loosely – to entail all of the entities covered in the proposed measure, believes that illnesses are their god’s will and shouldn’t be treated, or believe that suffering is virtuous and not treat sickle cell disease or rheumatoid arthritis?
Will patients be charged for an office visit when they are refused services? I’m guessing yes, because money and power always fuel Ohio’s zealotry.
Sue Haidle, Dublin