4 ms·

Interesting, I interpreted this in a completely different manner. I read the part about abortion as urging people to be receptive to changing social norms since

Interesting, I interpreted this in a completely different manner. I read the part about abortion as urging people to be receptive to changing social norms since many things we consider to be just were considered unethical not so long ago. The latter part I saw as urging caution against accepting the mandates of authority and conformity, because there's no guarantee that the authority or concensus is right (like society's past views on abortion). Of course, I didn't really know the background of the platform, so who knows what the author really intended. Likely, this is an instance of writing phrased in such a way that the reader can project their own views into it.

lliamander 8y ago
Although a possible interpretation, I consider that unlikely. Immediately preceding the section on abortion we have the following comment: > There is nowadays a tendency for rights to spread, like ink through blotting paper. And then immediately following: > A recent article in the New England Journal of Medicine argued that doctors should not be permitted to opt out of performing procedures that they considered unethical on the grounds of conscientious objection. Having read some of the author's other work, I'm fairly confident he is against abortion. However, think the broader point here is that increasingly doctors are being legally required to act in ways that run contrary to their own personal moral judgments. Regardless of how the young aspiring doctor feels about abortion (or anything else) It seems reasonable to prepare them for the possibility that they may have to choose between their conscience and the demands of their profession.
- nradov 8y ago
  It's not just physicians. There have been issues with pharmacists refusing to dispense legally prescribed abortifacients. Should they be legally required to give patients certain drugs which conflict with their personal morals?
  - nkrisc 8y ago
    Perhaps not required but instead prohibited from abusing their role as a middleman in interfering with another's treatment.
    - nradov 8y ago
      Pharmacists aren't middlemen. They are licensed healthcare providers with a critical role in patient care that goes beyond just handing over pill bottles.
      - evrydayhustling 8y ago
        That may describe the professionals training and intended role in the ecosystem, but it does not describe most patients' experience of the pharmacist.
        daodedickinson 8y ago
        What empirical studies do you know justify this claim?
        evrydayhustling 8y ago
        Um the experience of waiting in line at the drug store in four states in the last fifteen years? If you think most people have a more involved relationship with their pharmacist, I doubt I'm going to dissuade you.
        perl4ever 8y ago
        It was just over ten years ago, but I had the experience of having an allergic reaction to a medication prescribed to me, and a pharmacist that was knowledgeable enough to warn me not to take the obvious OTC remedy for my symptoms because it would likely make things worse.
        evrydayhustling 8y ago
  - DanBC 8y ago
    > Should they be legally required to give patients certain drugs They're not legally forced to do so. They can chose any other job. But if they chose that job then yes, they need to fill the fucking prescriptions correctly.

lliamander 8y ago

Although a possible interpretation, I consider that unlikely. Immediately preceding the section on abortion we have the following comment: > There is nowadays a tendency for rights to spread, like ink through blotting paper. And then immediately following: > A recent article in the New England Journal of Medicine argued that doctors should not be permitted to opt out of performing procedures that they considered unethical on the grounds of conscientious objection. Having read some of the author's other work, I'm fairly confident he is against abortion. However, think the broader point here is that increasingly doctors are being legally required to act in ways that run contrary to their own personal moral judgments. Regardless of how the young aspiring doctor feels about abortion (or anything else) It seems reasonable to prepare them for the possibility that they may have to choose between their conscience and the demands of their profession.

nradov 8y ago
It's not just physicians. There have been issues with pharmacists refusing to dispense legally prescribed abortifacients. Should they be legally required to give patients certain drugs which conflict with their personal morals?
- nkrisc 8y ago
  Perhaps not required but instead prohibited from abusing their role as a middleman in interfering with another's treatment.
  - nradov 8y ago
    Pharmacists aren't middlemen. They are licensed healthcare providers with a critical role in patient care that goes beyond just handing over pill bottles.
    - evrydayhustling 8y ago
      That may describe the professionals training and intended role in the ecosystem, but it does not describe most patients' experience of the pharmacist.
      - daodedickinson 8y ago
        What empirical studies do you know justify this claim?
        evrydayhustling 8y ago
        Um the experience of waiting in line at the drug store in four states in the last fifteen years? If you think most people have a more involved relationship with their pharmacist, I doubt I'm going to dissuade you.
        perl4ever 8y ago
        It was just over ten years ago, but I had the experience of having an allergic reaction to a medication prescribed to me, and a pharmacist that was knowledgeable enough to warn me not to take the obvious OTC remedy for my symptoms because it would likely make things worse.
        evrydayhustling 8y ago
- DanBC 8y ago
  > Should they be legally required to give patients certain drugs They're not legally forced to do so. They can chose any other job. But if they chose that job then yes, they need to fill the fucking prescriptions correctly.