Is it ok for Dr's to lie to patients to prevent an abortion?

[nonpareil]

Are the red states competing to become the most retarded state on women's issues or what?

 

[Thunder]

Arizona once again leading the way in absolutely ridiculous legislation. Are they going for the record of how many laws they can get rejected by SCOTUS in a five year period?

edited...for truth.

 

[nonpareil]

Most “people who are supposedly for ‘small government’” are not anarchists. The vast majority of us do believe and recognize that there are certain functions, duties, and responsibilities that must be born by government. And most of us believe that enacting and enforcing laws which prohibit one person from unjustly taking the life of another fall solidly under these duties and responsibilities.

This is not an anti-abortion law, it's a law that seeks to protect from group of people from another group that seeks justice through the court system when they feel they have been wronged. If the doctor choose to act in a certain way, then that doctor can stand up for it in court, without "big government" protecting them right? Or it's really, you want the government to interfere where it agrees with your opinion, but not where it doesn't.

 

[Thunder]

its unethical to lie to a patient.

however refusing to provide certain information, that is unrelated to the health of the patient, isn't unethical.

 

[nonpareil]

It's wrong for them to lie, but it's not wrong for them to do everything within their legal right to protect a human right. As a future doctor of pharmacy I will not dispense abortifacient drugs for the purpose of killing another human. It's not ok to lie and compromise patient health.

Pro-life doctor should remove themselves from cases where they think the couple is planning to have abortion if they have all the information. That's all they should be entitled to, not to continue to act as their doctor and then withhold information. I don't see how a doctor can "withhold information" that was asked for outright without "lying".

 

[AGENT J]

Pro-life doctor should remove themselves from cases where they think the couple is planning to have abortion if they have all the information. That's all they should be entitled to, not to continue to act as their doctor and then withhold information. I don't see how a doctor can "withhold information" that was asked for outright without "lying".

its a violation of rights and freedoms those that think otherwise are simply being dishonesty or blinded by bias

 

[MaggieD]

its unethical to lie to a patient.

however refusing to provide certain information, that is unrelated to the health of the patient, isn't unethical.

Doctors cannot refuse to provide any relevant information they are privvy to...not one lil' iota.

 

[JasonI]

Doctors cannot refuse to provide any relevant information they are privvy to...not one lil' iota.

because if they did, they would be lying...

 

[Paschendale]

It is not okay for a doctor to lie to a patient under nearly any circumstances. The only permissible time is when lying is absolutely necessary to save the patient's life. And only the patient, not the patient's unborn child.

 

[AGENT J]

Doctors cannot refuse to provide any relevant information they are privvy to...not one lil' iota.

who gets to decide what is "relevant"

 

[Thunder]

Doctors cannot refuse to provide any relevant information they are privvy to...not one lil' iota.

well, then that doctor should have a stated policy that they will not participate in any procedures who's outcome & information might be used to justify an abortion.

 

[lizzie]

Arizona Senate approves lying to women to prevent abortions

By David Edwards
Thursday, March 8, 2012 12:23 EDT

401


Topics: arizona senate ♦ Nancy Barto

The Arizona Senate on Tuesday approved a bill that would allow doctors withhold information about prenatal problems if it could make the decision to have an abortion more likely.

Republican state Sen. Nancy Barto introduced the measure to protect doctors from so-called “wrongful birth” lawsuits.

Such lawsuits are sometimes filed by parents of children with disabilities who believe that doctors withheld information that could have led to the decision to have an abortion.


“When I first heard of this issue, I couldn’t believe that these lawsuits are actually happening,” Barto told KTAR last month. “That some couples, after they give birth to their child that has a disability, would claim that the child should not have been born, and would sue to get damages.”

“The lawsuits that are being brought imply that the physician is somehow at fault if the child is born with a disability,” she added.


Arizona Senate approves lying to women to prevent abortions | The Raw Story

There really aren't very many problems that I am aware of which would fit this scenario. There's only so much that can be ascertained via ultrasound, unless there is genetic testing and amniocentesis, in which case, I highly doubt that doctors would want or need to lie.

 

[MaggieD]

who gets to decide what is "relevant"

The civil trial jury. Or....even a criminal one in certain circumstances.

 

[joko104]

well, then that doctor should have a stated policy that they will not participate in any procedures who's outcome & information might be used to justify an abortion.

That's not enough. It should be clearly stated the doctor/lab will provide misinformation if they believe it might give the woman reason to have an abortion. That needs to be in VERY LARGE letters on the office and examination room - in multiple languages.

 

[joko104]

It is not okay for a doctor to lie to a patient under nearly any circumstances. The only permissible time is when lying is absolutely necessary to save the patient's life. And only the patient, not the patient's unborn child.

Ouch, that's a tough one. Give an example.

 

[AClockworkGrape]

Lying in any instance in the medical field, unless it's to preserve patient-doctor confidentiality, is unethical, no exceptions.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

Arizona Senate approves lying to women to prevent abortions

By David Edwards
Thursday, March 8, 2012 12:23 EDT

401


Topics: arizona senate ♦ Nancy Barto

The Arizona Senate on Tuesday approved a bill that would allow doctors withhold information about prenatal problems if it could make the decision to have an abortion more likely.

Republican state Sen. Nancy Barto introduced the measure to protect doctors from so-called “wrongful birth” lawsuits.

Such lawsuits are sometimes filed by parents of children with disabilities who believe that doctors withheld information that could have led to the decision to have an abortion.


“When I first heard of this issue, I couldn’t believe that these lawsuits are actually happening,” Barto told KTAR last month. “That some couples, after they give birth to their child that has a disability, would claim that the child should not have been born, and would sue to get damages.”

“The lawsuits that are being brought imply that the physician is somehow at fault if the child is born with a disability,” she added.


Arizona Senate approves lying to women to prevent abortions | The Raw Story

Why doesn't it occur to them that maybe truth and frank discussion should be given to prevent abortion.

:shrug:

 

[nota bene]

Lying in any instance in the medical field, unless it's to preserve patient-doctor confidentiality, is unethical, no exceptions.

No. Lying in any instance, period, is unethical. The professional field is irrelevant.

 

[AClockworkGrape]

No. Lying in any instance, period, is unethical. The professional field is irrelevant.

This is true, but especially so in the medical field, where you are entrusted with a person's most intimate information and are required to be trustworthy and do your utmost to protect your patients.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

It is not okay for a doctor to lie to a patient under nearly any circumstances. The only permissible time is when lying is absolutely necessary to save the patient's life. And only the patient, not the patient's unborn child.

The unborn child is a patient, just as that child's mother is. A doctor treating a pregnant woman has two patients, and any ethical doctor will be concerned for the well-being of both.

But even if that were not so, it's always ethical to lie, or commit any other minor wrong, in order to prevent a much greater evil. It is certainly ethical to lie in order to protect an innocent person from someone who seeks to unjustly take that person's life.

If I knew that there was someone who wanted to murder my neighbor, and that would-be killer asked me if I knew where that neighbor was, I would lie, if necessary, in order to obstruct the would-killer from finding his intended victim. It has nothing to do with whether or not any kind of professional relationship exists between me and the neighbor. If I were to tell someone where my neighbor was, knowing that the person to whom I was telling that intended to murder my neighbor, this would make me a willing accessory to that murder.

A doctor, telling a pregnant woman that her child has a condition such as Down's syndrome, knowing that that woman intends to murder the child if the child has such a condition, would similarly be a willing accessory to that murder.

 

[Your Star]

The unborn child is a patient, just as that child's mother is. A doctor treating a pregnant woman has two patients, and any ethical doctor will be concerned for the well-being of both.

But even if that were not so, it's always ethical to lie, or commit any other minor wrong, in order to prevent a much greater evil. It is certainly ethical to lie in order to protect an innocent person from someone who seeks to unjustly take that person's life.

If I knew that there was someone who wanted to murder my neighbor, and that would-be killer asked me if I knew where that neighbor was, I would lie, if necessary, in order to obstruct the would-killer from finding his intended victim. It has nothing to do with whether or not any kind of professional relationship exists between me and the neighbor. If I were to tell someone where my neighbor was, knowing that the person to whom I was telling that intended to murder my neighbor, this would make me a willing accessory to that murder.

A doctor, telling a pregnant woman that her child has a condition such as Down's syndrome, knowing that that woman intends to murder the child if the child has such a condition, would similarly be a willing accessory to that murder.

Again, it's sad that you are so extreme in your position that you can't see what harm you would be doing to our healthcare system. Shame on you.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

LOL - he's not listening to you. He's busy looking for a fulcrum to shove the fat man off the bridge and onto the lever on the tracks.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Again, it's sad that you are so extreme in your position that you can't see what harm you would be doing to our healthcare system. Shame on you.

A “healthcare system” that has, as one of its perceived functions, the murder of innocent children, is already much more harmed than could be caused by anything that I would advocate.

The only legitimate purpose of a health care system is to preserve and improve life—not to destroy it.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

A “healthcare system” that has, as one of its perceived functions, the murder of innocent children, is already much more harmed than could be caused by anything that I would advocate.

The only legitimate purpose of a health care system is to preserve and improve life—not to destroy it.

Words have meanings. It's not murder. It's abortion.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Words have meanings. It's not murder. It's abortion.

Calling something by a different name does not change what it is.