Yes. But to enact a law on a federal level the federal government must define "Medical Necessity" as it pertains to abortion to give a clear cut law that can not be misused by hospitals, medical practitioners, or the client themselves. Until then it is up to the individual who believes that they have been denied necessary treatment or were in some way discriminated against by the Hospital or practitioner in a court of law to gain due compensation. The ACLU is pushing for a law on the federal level and is basically trying to get the government to enact a law which would then be set for the country as a whole and not at a state government level. Due to the swing of government from left to right it would be very hard to enact a law like that.
The circumstances here are pretty clear. Women are having miscarriages that are putting their health and lives at risk, and Catholic-run hospitals are refusing care on the grounds that saving the woman's life would require an abortion.
It was not clear to the courts though which is why the ACLU did not win the case. Now if they get enough evidence of wrongdoing then they can win. My main problem is being pro choice and a federal law demanding action either for or against abortion would take choice out of the equation. In Tennessee we have a law that states that the government at the state level can dictate laws on healthcare without a prior vote from the people. This means that the state government has taken away our right to make a decision for ourselves. Whether the state runs red or blue the people do not have a voice. This covers abortions, sex change operations, the flu, etc, etc,.... The people actually gave them the right to do so because "Abortion is Wrong!!!!" and "Abortion is against my Religion!! both statements were based more on feelings rather than understanding. So the government can now say ALL ABORTIONS ARE ILLEGAL! So I am very skeptical when the Government at any level starts dictating these types of issues.
If the ACLU does get enough evidence against the Catholic Institution and proves that there is wrong doing or negligence then they will win their case and perhaps there will be a new law to deal with. But the article itself seems to be pulling more on emotions than anything. I keep my belief that abortions should be a choice between the client and the doctor and not mandated or outlawed by the government at any level. That is my emotion poking through on this topic.
Yes. But to enact a law on a federal level the federal government must define "Medical Necessity" as it pertains to abortion to give a clear cut law that can not be misused by hospitals, medical practitioners, or the client themselves. Until then it is up to the individual who believes that they have been denied necessary treatment or were in some way discriminated against by the Hospital or practitioner in a court of law to gain due compensation. The ACLU is pushing for a law on the federal level and is basically trying to get the government to enact a law which would then be set for the country as a whole and not at a state government level. Due to the swing of government from left to right it would be very hard to enact a law like that.
The circumstances here are pretty clear. Women are having miscarriages that are putting their health and lives at risk, and Catholic-run hospitals are refusing care on the grounds that saving the woman's life would require an abortion.
It was not clear to the courts though which is why the ACLU did not win the case. Now if they get enough evidence of wrongdoing then they can win. My main problem is being pro choice and a federal law demanding action either for or against abortion would take choice out of the equation. In Tennessee we have a law that states that the government at the state level can dictate laws on healthcare without a prior vote from the people. This means that the state government has taken away our right to make a decision for ourselves. Whether the state runs red or blue the people do not have a voice. This covers abortions, sex change operations, the flu, etc, etc,.... The people actually gave them the right to do so because "Abortion is Wrong!!!!" and "Abortion is against my Religion!! both statements were based more on feelings rather than understanding. So the government can now say ALL ABORTIONS ARE ILLEGAL! So I am very skeptical when the Government at any level starts dictating these types of issues.
If the ACLU does get enough evidence against the Catholic Institution and proves that there is wrong doing or negligence then they will win their case and perhaps there will be a new law to deal with. But the article itself seems to be pulling more on emotions than anything. I keep my belief that abortions should be a choice between the client and the doctor and not mandated or outlawed by the government at any level. That is my emotion poking through on this topic.