- The American Conservative - http://www.theamericanconservative.com -

NYC: No Traditional Christian Doctors Allowed

From Crain’s New York Business [1]:

A new LGBTQ Health Care Bill of Rights created by the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene highlights existing protections at the city, state and federal levels to guard against discrimination in the doctor’s office.
These include the right to have your gender identity recognized and accommodated, and the right to choose who will make your medical decisions if you’re unable to do so.
The city released the ten-point Bill of Rights [2] Tuesday in honor of Pride Month, along with a new ad campaign [3] encouraging people to “bare it all” to their doctors by talking about everything—including sex and drugs.
One of the posters for the campaign, which will appear on city transit, features Dr. Demetre Daskalakis, deputy commissioner for the health department’s Division of Disease Control, ripping his shirt open.
“We need to empower LGBTQ people with the knowledge that their health matters and with strategies to access the best-possible culturally responsive health care,” Daskalakis said in a statement.

A reader who sent this item in says [emphasis his]:

Many of these legal rights are positive or unobjectionable, but one is highly problematic: “Have your gender identity and gender expression recognized, affirmed, documented and accommodated.”

This, the reader says, will make it much harder to be a traditionally religious doctor in New York City.

If you think it will stop in NYC, you’re dreaming. From The Benedict Option [4]:

Public school teachers, college professors, doctors, and lawyers will all face tremendous pressure to capitulate to this ideology as a condition of employment. So will psychologists, social workers, and all in the helping professions; and of course, florists, photographers, backers, and all businesses that are subject to public accommodation laws.

Christian students and their parents must take this into careful consideration when deciding on a field of study in college and professional school. A nationally prominent physician who is also a devout Christian tells me he discourages his children from following in his footsteps. Doctors now and in the near future will be dealing with issues related to sex, sexuality, and gender identity but also to abortion and euthanasia. “Patient autonomy” and nondiscrimination are the principles that trump all conscience considerations, and physicians are expected to fall in line.

“If they make compliance a matter of licensure, there will be nowhere to hide,” said this physician. “And then what do you do if you’re three hundred thousand dollars in debt from medical school, and have a family with three kids and a sick parent? Tough call, because there aren’t too many parishes or church communities who would jump in and help.”

Educate yourself. Speak out. Urge your pastors to speak out. But: prepare yourself, your family, and your community for a time of great testing. It’s coming. If we’re not talking about it and getting ready for it now, we’re fools. Start the conversation in your community now.  [4]

57 Comments (Open | Close)

57 Comments To "NYC: No Traditional Christian Doctors Allowed"

#1 Comment By Sam M On June 9, 2017 @ 12:31 pm

Pepi:

“Huh? You do realize that people who are transitioning go to SPECIALISTS for those services and that no Christian doctor who has a problem with it would choose that specialty?”

What specialties are you talking about? There is no “gender reassignment” specialty. Generally, there will be a team of doctors working on any case, such as general surgeons, plastic surgeons, endocrinologists, urologists, pediatricians, etc. The question is whether or not any of these physicians could refuse to work on a case if they feel that, say, cutting off a functioning penis is in the best interests of a patient.

I have no problem with a health system requiring employed physicians to work with such patients. In a sane world, I think a large health system should probably find a team of doctors eager to work on these cases, and carve out room for doctors who don’t. But I am libertarian enough that I think it should be the employers call if they want to roust out doctors who don’t want to work on those cases.

What I DO object to is a department of health from any municipality demanding statements of ally-ship, or accrediting agencies demanding compliance with the SJW cause du jour.

The issue of “best practice” is a huge issue in medicine. Some doctors believe that Natural Family Planning is the best and healthiest form of contraception, just like some doctors believe that eating organic is important, or that the approach of a DO is better than an MD’s. Some doctors have strongly differing opinions about whether open heart surgery or catheterization is more appropriate in a given circumstance. Doctors can disagree about that. They can disagree about whether a biological boy should be taking hormone therapy to grow breasts, and when and if someone should turn his penis into a vagina.

Of course, we saw in that case in Canada that anyone who even suggests that maybe we should pause and wait until later to see if the gender dysphoria clears up in kids before amputating.. that person is a bigot whose career must be destroyed.

Oh… just pick a specialty that doesn’t deal with transgender transitioning. Really? Which specialities are those?

[NFR: I am bound by confidentiality not to reveal details, but I am aware of a medical professional whose field has very little to do with transgenderism, but she has been sued by a transgendered person for not wishing to provide her services (the transgendered plaintiff decided that s/he needed this person’s help in something to do with transition). I never would have imagined that this kind of medical professional would be drawn into this mess, but that’s the world we live in. It will find you, no matter where you are. — RD]

#2 Comment By EngineerScotty On June 9, 2017 @ 5:18 pm

[NFR: I am bound by confidentiality not to reveal details, but I am aware of a medical professional whose field has very little to do with transgenderism, but she has been sued by a transgendered person for not wishing to provide her services (the transgendered plaintiff decided that s/he needed this person’s help in something to do with transition). I never would have imagined that this kind of medical professional would be drawn into this mess, but that’s the world we live in. It will find you, no matter where you are. — RD]

But the devil is in the details.

If the professional in question is a urologist declining to amputate a penis as part of gender-reassignment, I would say that said doctor is within his/her rights–but you said “a field which has little to do with transgenderism”, which certainly doesn’t describe urology.

If, OTOH, we’re talking about a cosmetic surgeon who happily performs non-theraputic nose jobs on women who want to look more attractive, but declines to perform the same therapy on an M2F who wants to look more like a woman–this is a harder bit of discrimination to justify. “I think the procedure is medially unnecessary or unsound” is far better grounds for a physician to decline treatment than “I don’t like the patient”, and any doc who performs glamour nose-jobs already has thrown medical necessity to the wind, and has already conceded that such procedures are therapeutically useful.

#3 Comment By MichaelGC On June 9, 2017 @ 7:46 pm

Erin Manning says on June 9, 2017 at 4:26 am:

I know, I know, it will never happen. And when it does, those of us too bigoted to believe that a three-year-old transgender girl can also be a genderfluid boy named Darth Vader (but only on occasion) whose pronoun choices are absolutely sacrosanct deserve what’s coming to us, right?

Actually, it already has happened. Instead of a 3 year old genderfluid girl it is a [5]

The National Center for Transgender Equality in WA DC (the same from which Obama hired his openly transgender LGBT Liaison) published an audio gushing over the adorable little Stefonknee and how “Steffy moves through the world with a grace that is totally unparalleled.”

#4 Comment By bob On June 9, 2017 @ 11:47 pm

It’s a real problem for, say, Ms. Jenner et al if he shows up in the ER. If he’s losing blood do the earnest medical staff hold up 3 bags of blood of different types and ask which one he prefers? That is, what type does he self-identify *as*? Surely the “actual” blood type can’t be merely be determined in a lab on the spot like you or I would have done, that would suggest that he must “accept” the type he was (astonishing phrase) “assigned at birth”. You see The Man “assigns” the sex of the baby, right? I expect The Man also decides A, B, AB, O, +, -, blood types. No one would ever simply give someone a transfusion based on a “biological fact” without sensitively asking preference in 2017 now would they? The demand seems to be that scientifically trained medical professionals begin to practice magic. OK, Penn & Teller will see you now. But remember, they practice *illusions*. That’s just what is demanded now. I think the demand for entertainment is OK if you charge extra for it. Boring, ordinary medicine based on actual biology should be provided at a price less than the rate for flakes. Two tiered? You bet. It ought to be.

#5 Comment By Siarlys Jenkins On June 10, 2017 @ 11:09 pm

If, OTOH, we’re talking about a cosmetic surgeon who happily performs non-theraputic nose jobs on women who want to look more attractive, but declines to perform the same therapy on an M2F who wants to look more like a woman–this is a harder bit of discrimination to justify.

How is this “discrimination” at all? Its not something the doctor cares to do. Its not ‘I would do this but I don’t like you.’ There is a necessarily a LOT of discretion to giving medical advice, and trying to stuff if all into a rigid set of rules is absurd.

The notion “I’ve been discriminated against” is greatly overplayed, and many manifestations of it need to be dispassionately quashed.

Blame it on “massive resistance” to racial discrimination. Those determined to preserve the 50 year experiment with “separate but equal” did indeed indulge all kinds of sophistry, euphemism, and subterfuge, and this is the residue of it all. EVERY thing that happens that you don’t like, EVERY time someone won’t give you what you want, is NOT cause to scream “discrimination.”

#6 Comment By MEOW On June 12, 2017 @ 10:09 am

First they got rid of Christmas. Now Christians?

#7 Comment By Siarlys Jenkins On June 12, 2017 @ 3:09 pm

The demise of Christmas has been greatly exaggerated. Most people I know celebrate it every year. And I don’t mean “Xmas.”