September 20, 2020 The Newspaper Serving LGBT Los Angeles

In Trump’s America, the Hippocratic Oath Comes Under Threat

On Thursday, January 18, two days after a new “Religious Freedom Day” was declared by the government, the Trump administration announced that religious rights protections would be increased for healthcare workers who decline to practice procedures that they are religiously opposed to, such as abortions and gender confirmation surgeries. Sensing the inherent conflict between this promise and the basis of the Hippocratic oath that all healthcare professionals are made to take to ensure a non-biased approach medicine, writers, activists, and medical professionals took to Twitter to protest the decision.

[email protected]’s proclamation for Religious Freedom Day specifically says that no American should have to obey the law if it conflicts with their religion. Ahistorical and dangerous,” wrote the American Atheists account.

A nurse based in Fishers, Indiana tweeted: “I didn’t become a nurse to pick and choose who I will provide care for. If you have a true servants heart it shouldn’t matter if the patient is black, white, gay, straight, Muslim, Atheist, transgendered and so on. #treatallpatients.”

Meanwhile, Republicans like Virginia Senator Richard Black and Texas Congressman Michael McCaul referenced Jefferson’s 1786 Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom as a historical, and thus legitimate, precedent for Trump’s decision.

Like the infamous Masterpiece Cake Shop decision before it, in which a religious business owner refused to make a gay couple a wedding cake on religious grounds, the controversial choice to pit religious integrity against occupational neutrality creates a confusing, extremely divisive counter to the idea that human rights and religious rights are separate, unequal entities. By placing them together on the same plane, the Trump administration has begun to treat religious doctors, nurses, and healthcare professionals as a protected class. Healthcare workers and medical establishments in general are also, under the new decision, being treated more like private businesses, which are by law entitled to bias, rather than public service institutions.

But does the choice to tie church, state, and hospital together go against the very basis of the medical profession?

The first statute of the original Hippocratic oath is: “To place the good of the patient at the center of my professional practice and, when the gravity of the situation demands, above my own self interest.” The problem is that a term like ‘good’, or even the phrase “self interest,” becomes increasingly subjective and vulnerable to re-definition. If the idea of bias belongs to everyone, it’s possible that everyone can claim themselves to be part of a protected class. But how can you be protected against the promise you yourself made to protect and serve without bias?

The Hippocratic oath wasn’t always seen as a mandatory part of the job for healthcare workers. However, in recent years, it’s become more common, and more crucial, for students to enter the profession by guaranteeing non-biased treatment to patients from all walks of life. According to an article in Georgetown University’s Journal of Health Sciences, in 2012, “100 percent of medical school graduates in the United States swear to some variation of the Hippocratic Oath (as opposed to just 24 percent in 1928.)”

The attitude toward religious freedom protection for healthcare workers has yo-yoed back and forth since 1973’s Roe v Wade victory, with Republican-led governments usually favoring religious protections and Democrat-led administrations scaling back those same protections. The “Church Amendments” were introduced in the 1970s, at the start of Roe v. Wade, to allow medical practitioners to ‘opt out’ of performing abortions if it conflicted with their religious beliefs. Since that time, gender confirmation surgeries have been added to the list of procedures that healthcare workers can choose not to perform due to religious conflict. In 1996, a new act, titled Public Health Service Act 245, underwrote these protections by stipulating that the federal government would not fund hospitals or practices that “discriminated” against workers who refused to perform abortions.

The use of the word ‘discrimination’ as it applies to, in this case, the original discriminating party, is interesting in light of Trump’s recent decisions regarding transgender individuals in the military and healthcare in general. As the question of what makes a protected class grows murkier, Americans find themselves having to choose between personal morality and collective democracy.

Related Posts

AIDS Walk Los Angeles 2020

August 27, 2020

August 27, 2020

AIDS Walk Los Angeles (AWLA) is the world’s first walk to fight HIV and AIDS. 35 years ago, a group...

The Best Cancer Treatment You Have Never Heard Of – Hyperthermia Cancer Institute

August 19, 2020

August 19, 2020

The Hyperthermia Cancer Institute, is a cancer therapy approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to be used with...

August Celebrated As Anal Pleasure Month

August 9, 2020

August 9, 2020

In 2012 August was declared to be anal pleasure month which is unbeknownst to many people. Good Vibrations, an adult...

6 in 10 Queer Men With COVID Symptoms Hide Them From Partners

August 9, 2020

August 9, 2020

COVID 19 is affecting everything from businesses to government and now it is taking a toll on people’s sex lives....

CancerCare Offers Online Support to LGBTQ+ Community

August 5, 2020

August 5, 2020

CancerCare helps individuals, families, caregivers and the bereaved cope with the emotional and practical challenges of cancer. Its free services...

How COVID-19 Impacts Black LGBTQ+ People

May 15, 2020

May 15, 2020

Amidst horrifying racial disparities, “COVID While Black and Queer” is a new data initiative that will shine a light on...

Lawmakers Ask State and Counties to Collect Data on LGBTQ Community and COVID-19

April 14, 2020

April 14, 2020

Senator Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) and Assemblymember Todd Gloria, Chair and Vice-Chair of the California Legislative LGBTQ Caucus respectively, sent...

Los Angeles LGBT Center on Coronavirus Resources

March 22, 2020

March 22, 2020

The Los Angeles LGBT Center has released the following recommendations for members of the LGBTQ+ community during the novel coronavirus...

Coronavirus’ Added Risk for LGBTQ+ Communities

March 17, 2020

March 17, 2020

More than 100 LGBTQ+ organizations have signed an open letter outlining the added risk the novel coronavirus poses on the...

Confronting Meth Crisis in California’s LGBTQ Communities

February 26, 2020

February 26, 2020

Senator Wiener introduces bill to confront meth crisis using contingency management intervention By Kerry Slater Senator Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco)...

Transgender Care Services Coming to Baldwin Park

February 18, 2020

February 18, 2020

By Staff Writer A new Planned Parenthood center opening soon in Baldwin Park will provide transgender care services to a...

Addressing LA’s Increase in Syphilis

February 14, 2020

February 14, 2020

Legislation introduced to allow expanded rapid testing By Chole Marie Rivera February 4, Senator Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) introduced legislation...

Honoring National Black HIV/AIDS Awareness Day at the ONE Archive

February 4, 2020

February 4, 2020

National Black HIV/AIDS Awareness Day is on Friday, February 7. In the LGBTQ+ community, HIV/AIDS disproportionately affects gay black men...

Public Outcry Temporarily Saves Los Angeles LGBT Center’s STD, HIV Services

January 28, 2020

January 28, 2020

The temporary agreement restores funding through the end of March. The Los Angeles LGBT Center announced today that it has...

HEALTH FEATURE: Need a Podiatrist?

January 26, 2020

January 26, 2020

Dr. Steven L. Rosenberg treating foot injuries with traditional, regenerative and homeopathic medicine.  By Staff Writer If you suffer from...