Comments on Obama conscience regulationsTypePad2011-02-18T16:54:19ZRick Garnetthttps://mirrorofjustice.blogs.com/mirrorofjustice/tag:typepad.com,2003:https://mirrorofjustice.blogs.com/mirrorofjustice/2011/02/obama-conscience-regulations/comments/atom.xml/rachelleB commented on 'Obama conscience regulations'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d834515a9a69e20147e2ceff1a970b2011-02-25T09:52:50Z2011-02-25T09:52:50ZrachelleBOH..I see...In some corners of the United States, a conscience clause exists that gives medical care workers the legal right...<p>OH..I see...In some corners of the United States, a conscience clause exists that gives medical care workers the legal right to opt out of performing some treatments that clash with their spiritual values. Critics of the terms believe that a doctor cannot refuse to treat a patient if that treatment can conserve a life. The Hippocratic Oath compels medical professionals to treat patients fairly and without bias. Now several of those workers won't be able to site the conscience clause, reports the Washington Post. Obama's reworking of the clause strips out several of the protections written in by the last Bush administration. </p>Bill Collier commented on 'Obama conscience regulations'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d834515a9a69e2014e5f4e8081970c2011-02-18T19:44:53Z2011-02-18T19:44:53ZBill CollierI see your point, Rob, and I should have been clearer and more precise in making my point. The 2008...<p>I see your point, Rob, and I should have been clearer and more precise in making my point. The 2008 Final Rule (and the regs at 42 USC Part 88) didn't define abortion, contraception, etc., but in modifying other definitions (e.g., individual, health care entity, assist in the performance) already found in the Church Amendment, HHS commented on the feedback the agency had received about its proposed definitional modifications. The HHS specifically chose not to include a definition of "abortion," despite the urging of some commenters that a definition of "abortion" in the federal health care provider conscience statutes was needed to make clear that "abortion" excludes contraceptive services. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.freedom2care.org/docLib/20090313_HHS_20081218_reg_FINAL.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.freedom2care.org/docLib/20090313_HHS_20081218_reg_FINAL.pdf</a> </p>
<p>(See page 23ff. The highlighting in the document is not mine.)</p>
<p>In the Obama Final Rule you linked us to, the HHS notes that, on the basis of numerous comments to the Bush Final Rule, the agency's definitional efforts (and non-definitional efforts) in the Bush Final Rule may have been more confusing than helpful, especially the agency's reluctance to more clearly define "abortion." Numerous comments to the Bush Final Rule questioned whether that rule expanded the scope of the underlying provider conscience statutes by suggesting that "abortion" includes contraception. In the Obama Final Rule, HHS abandoned its definitional efforts because "comments received illustrated that there is significant division over whether the definitions provided by the 2008 Final Rule are in line with the longstanding federal health care provider conscience statutes." <br />
</p>David Nickol commented on 'Obama conscience regulations'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d834515a9a69e2014e8628df2f970d2011-02-18T18:55:26Z2011-02-18T18:55:26ZDavid NickolActually, the original draft of the Bush regulations defined abortion as "any of the various procedures -- including the prescription...<p>Actually, the original draft of the Bush regulations defined abortion as "any of the various procedures -- including the prescription and administration of any drug or the performance of any procedure or any other action -- that results in the termination of the life of a human being in utero between conception and natural birth, whether before or after implantation." That definition did not make it into the final regulations.</p>rob vischer commented on 'Obama conscience regulations'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d834515a9a69e20147e2a92328970b2011-02-18T18:06:59Z2011-02-18T18:06:59Zrob vischerBill, the Bush regs didn't define abortion, contraception, or sterilization (unless I'm missing something). The breadth of the Bush regs...<p>Bill, the Bush regs didn't define abortion, contraception, or sterilization (unless I'm missing something). The breadth of the Bush regs is a consequence of 42 USC 300a-7(d), isn't it? That provision extends conscience protection beyond abortion, and the Bush regs didn't add anything to that. I'm having a hard time seeing what would've been problematic to the Obama HHS about the Bush regs' definitions, other than perhaps "assist in the performance" being defined to include any "reasonable connection to the objectionable procedure" with an example given of the person cleaning instruments used in the procedure. </p>Bill Collier commented on 'Obama conscience regulations'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d834515a9a69e2014e5f4e09a7970c2011-02-18T17:53:28Z2011-02-18T17:53:28ZBill CollierThe Final Rule scraps the definitional section in the Bush 2008 final rule because HHS agreed with the commenters who...<p>The Final Rule scraps the definitional section in the Bush 2008 final rule because HHS agreed with the commenters who argued that the definitions of such terms as "contraception" and "sterilization" contained ambiguities. Instead of drafting new definitions or clarifying the 2008 defintions, the HHS has decided on refinement of terms by way of the new administrative enforcement mechanism set forth in the Final Rule. While there may be some confusion in the short term about some statutory/regulatory terms, I think punting construction of key terms to the admin adjudication forum is the better way to go because any definitions issued as part of the Final Rule would likely meet resistance by one group or another with an interest in conscience protections. </p>