Should Ontario MDs Be Allowed to Refuse Basic Healthcare to Women?

There was a spot of bother a few months back when "at least three" Ottawa family doctors refused to prescribe birth control because such an act would violate their Gord-given right to control women.

The Ontario College of Physicians and Surgeons, feeling the heat, has decided to revisit its policy on human rights and is inviting public input.

The site says the questionnaire will take only a few minutes and it does, but first you should read the existing policy.

It's not all bad but does provide some pretty wide wiggle-room for anti-choicers.

After citing some "general principles" from the Ontario Human Rights Codes, all good in my opinion, the policy offers this (bold mine).

College Expectations
The College has its own expectations for physicians who limit their practice, refuse to accept individuals as patients, or end a physician-patient relationship on the basis of moral or religious belief.

In these situations, the College expects physicians to do the following:

Communicate clearly and promptly about any treatments or procedures the physician chooses not to provide because of his or her moral or religious beliefs.

Provide information about all clinical options that may be available or appropriate based on the patient’s clinical needs or concerns. Physicians must not withhold information about the existence of a procedure or treatment because providing that procedure or giving advice about it conflicts with their religious or moral beliefs.

Treat patients or individuals who wish to become patients with respect when they are seeking or requiring the treatment or procedure. This means that physicians should not express personal judgments about the beliefs, lifestyle, identity or characteristics of a patient or an individual who wishes to become a patient. This also means that physicians should not promote their own religious beliefs when interacting with patients, nor should they seek to convert existing patients or individuals who wish to become patients to their own religion.

Advise patients or individuals who wish to become patients that they can see another physician with whom they can discuss their situation and in some circumstances, help the patient or individual make arrangements to do so.

OK, what's with the namby-pambyness? "In some circumstances"? Should be "in ALL CIRCUMSTANCES refer a patient to a practitioner whom the referrer KNOWS will provide the needed service." They can't get away with waving their hands and saying, "See someone else."

The situation is particularly problematic in under-served areas. What if there is only one OB-GYN for a large area and he or she refuses to prescribe contraception (or some forms of it), insert IUDs, or perform abortions?

What if one or more of a small number of GPs for a region refuses to prescribe birth control or refer for abortion?

How far do they expect women to travel to get basic everyday healthcare?

I don't know how it could be implemented, but the special circumstances of under-served areas require some creative thinking on the part of the College.

In any event, referrals must be mandatory. No exceptions.

We'll say it again. Women's rights and women's healthcare are NOT fucking conscience issues.


Public Service Section
Here's the survey. If you have a few minutes and care about this issue, please give them your thoughts.

Also on its invitation page is a quick poll, one question.

Do you think a physician should be allowed to refuse to provide a patient with a treatment or procedure because it conflicts with the physician’s religious or moral beliefs?

Yes or No.

Currently there are 1090 votes, 984 of which say religion trumps patient care. That's 90%. And that's hard to believe.

LifeShite is directing readers to the survey and quick poll. Gee, do you think they're freeping it?

Since we know most casual, i.e. non-frothing, fetus fetishists have the attention span of a gnat, that's probably as much as they're going to do.

So, certainly answer the one quick question, but if you can take the time, please do the survey.

ADDED: There's also a discussion board. Some interesting stuff there, but lots of whinging from the usual suspects.

First Insite and now this; more Con Hard-On crime.

The B.C. doctor who allowed a film crew to document his use of a traditional Amazonian tea to help drug addicts has been ordered to end the treatments.

Dr. Gabor Maté was using ayahuasca, which induces a trance that unlocks painful memories to help drug addicts end their addictive behaviour.

The active ingredients in the plant are restricted. Since CBC News reported on Maté's work on Sunday, Health Canada has threatened him with criminal prosecution if he continues.

From here and here.

[The] Canadian doctor and author who travelled to the Amazon to learn about a psychotropic medicine that may help drug addicts to recover.

Vancouver's Dr. Gabor Maté learned about ayahuasca, a hallucinogenic plant concoction used at a clinic in Peru. At the clinic, the cure rates for addicts is many times the average found in North America and Europe.

CBC's The Nature of Things joined Maté in South America and traced his efforts to treat addicts in Vancouver with ayahuasca, which occupies a grey area of the law in Canada.

The Conservatives in government are imposing their rightwing morality and fundamentalist religious bias to stop medical research that might save the lives of those in desperate need of medical care and support, and expressing their contempt for scientific research.

Dr Gabor Maté is known world wide for his compassionate work with parents and children. In recent years he has applied his knowledge toward harm reduction program for his patients living with addictions.

More DJ! posts about Dr Maté.

Hudork on Health

Speaking of pimping one's kid, Hudork dragged his three-year-old to Hamilton today to talk about healthcare.

From a report titled: 'On health care, Ontario's Hudak battles memories of Harris cuts' by Steve Ladrurantaye:

His daughter Miller was born six weeks premature, and more recently faced a three-week hospitalization for an undisclosed, but serious, illness. The happy three-year-old is a steady presence on the campaign trail, and often travels with Mr. Hudak when she’s not in school.

Oh yeah, we remember the Harris cuts. In particular, the 6,000 nurses fired remember the Harris cuts. Hudak, remember, was junior Health Minister for some of that time.

“Investing more in health care is necessary and prudent,” he said as he stood beside an ultrasound machine at St. Joseph’s Hospital, flanked by the two nurses in scrubs. “I personally know from my family’s experience how important it is to have quality health care where and when you need it … to me it’s personal.”

What? Flanked by nurses????

Wait. Apparently they couldn't find any Steel Town nurses to stand beside Hudak, so, according to Ladurantaye, they were shipped in from St Catharines complete with scrubs and stethoscopes.

Pimping your kid while bussing in ringers. Another great day for Hudork.

Fake Doctors with Real Drugs

This is just plain crazy.

Scott Gavura, a pharmacist, writes:

The other day, I went to a magic show. The magician manipulated energy fields, pulled toxins out of my stomach, and then gave me a remedy - but there was nothing inside. Then he pulled out a prescription pad, prescribed some Tamiflu, and sent me on my way.

Seem unlikely? Well, the Ontario government is poised to give another type of magician -- the naturopath -- prescribing rights, despite the reams of evidence discrediting their approach to patient health. It's a move that legitimizes a well-meaning but baseless profession, and puts patients at significant risk.

The piece was also published -- without linkies -- last week in the National Post (!?), followed this week by a rebuttal from one of the quacks who stand to benefit from the legislation. (The comments on both pieces are mostly reassuringly sensible.)

For background, here are a couple of articles on naturopathy.

And here's a terrifying site documenting the harm these fake doctors cause.

Here's the text of Bill 179.

Similar legislation has been passed in BC. A recent article in the Canadian Medical Association Journal describes the powers allowed under it:

In British Columbia, the government last April passed legislation allowing naturopathic practitioners to prescribe Schedule I medications, such as basic primary care drugs like antibiotics. In addition, qualified naturopaths will be able to prescribe hormones, botanicals, high-dose vitamins, amino acids and other natural substances they have traditionally used in their practices, but which are increasingly coming under federal control and scheduling limitations. As such, in many provinces such as BC, only medical doctors, dentists and veterinarians could previously prescribe substances such as digitalis and other botanicals and hormones that naturopaths normally used.

Under BC’s legislation and accompanying regulations, naturopaths will not prescribe certain restricted classes of medications, such as antipsychotics and chemotherapy drugs. The regulatory board that governs naturopathic doctors is now finalizing the standards and list of substances that naturopaths will be allowed to prescribe.

Naturopathy is quackery. It is not science-based. In fact, it rejects one of science's bedrock methods -- double-blind tests -- precisely because such tests demonstrate the utter futility of its 'treatments'. It also rejects vaccination.

And here's the call for action. Under the title I snaffled for this piece, Steve Thoms writes:

Defeating a bill in its third reading is rare, but not impossible. I'm asking for all Swift readers (especially the Canadians and Ontarians) to email the Ontario Premier, Dalton McGuinty, and (dmcguinty.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org), as well as the Minister of Long-Term Health and Care, Deb Mattews, (dmatthews.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org). It would also be wise to CC the same email to Andrea Horwath, leader of the New Democratic Party (ahorwath-qp@ndp. on.ca) and Tim Hudak, leader of the Progressive Conservative Party (tim.hudakco@pc.ola.org). The bill is under review by the Standing Committee on Social Policy (for a complete list of the members of the committee, click here), so Ontario residents would do well to email them as well. Remember to CC all correspondences, so that everyone knows who else is reading what.
. . .
We really need everyone's help defeating this affront to health care standards and patient safety. If we beat them in Ontario, we just might stop them in their tracks.

If anyone has any questions, feel free to contact me directly at skepticnorth@gmail.com.

Thanks a million
Steve Thoms
Editor-in-Chief,
Skeptic North
www.skepticnorth.com

Let's get those emails flying! Also, please spread the word to your friends, families, and associates of the not-insane type.