Clinton, Richards Opinion Piece Says HHS Proposal Lacks Protection For Patients

Main Category: Abortion
Also Included In: Women's Health / Gynecology;  Public Health;  Primary Care / General Practice
Article Date: 22 Sep 2008 - 8:00 PDT

email to a friend   printer friendly   view / write opinions   rate article

A proposed HHS regulation to require that "any health care entity that receives federal financing -- whether it's a physician in private practice, a hospital or a state government -- certify in writing that none of its employees are required to assist in any way with medical services they find objectionable" does not "even address the real cost to patients who might be refused access to these critical services," Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) and Cecile Richards, president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, write in a New York Times opinion piece. The regulation -- which would affect an estimated 600,000 health care providers, hospitals and clinics and cost about $44.5 million annually to administer -- is the "latest salvo" in the Bush administration's "eight year campaign to undermine women's rights and women's health by placing ideology ahead of science," the authors say.

According to Clinton and Richards, current laws already allow physicians to refuse to perform abortion, but the proposed HHS rule does not define abortion, meaning "individual health care providers could decide on their own that birth control is the same as abortion." In addition, the rule would "allow providers to refuse to participate in unspecified other medical procedures that contradict their religious beliefs or moral convictions," which could be "interpreted as a free pass to deny access to contraception."

The Bush administration "argues that the rule is designed to protect a provider's conscience. But where are the protections for patients?" Clinton and Richards ask, adding, "Women patients, who look to their health care providers as an unbiased source of medical information, might not even know they were being deprived of advice about their options or denied access to care." The comment period on the proposal ends on Sept. 25, Clinton and Richards write, concluding, "Everyone who believes that women should have full access to medical care should make their voices heard. Basic, quality care for millions of women is at stake" (Clinton/Richards, New York Times, 9/19).

Reprinted with kind permission from http://www.nationalpartnership.org. You can view the entire Daily Women's Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery here. The Daily Women's Health Policy Report is a free service of the National Partnership for Women & Families, published by The Advisory Board Company.

© 2008 The Advisory Board Company. All rights reserved.