Bush says change reinforces protections for doctors who refuse to participate in procedures due to religious or moral objections
WASHINGTON — The Bush administration, in its final days, issued a federal rule Thursday, Dec. 18, reinforcing protections for doctors and other health care workers who refuse to participate in abortions and other procedures because of religious or moral objections.
Critics say the protections are so broad they limit a patient’s right to get care and accurate information. For example, they fear the rule could make it possible for a pharmacy clerk to refuse to sell birth control pills without ramifications from an employer.
Transgender advocates say the new rule could have a huge impact on health care for transgender men and women.
"Transgender people already experience tremendous hostility and discrimination in the health care setting," said Transgender Legal Defense & Education Fund Executive Director Michael Silverman said. "We oppose HHS’ new regulation and call upon President-elect Obama and the new administration to rescind this policy as soon as they take office."
Officials have said that even if Obama were to rescind the rule immediately after taking office, it could take several months for that to go into effect.
Silverman noted that Sens. Hillary Clinton and Patty Murray have already introduced legislation designed to block HHS from moving forward with the rule and "we applaud them for doing so."
Under long-standing federal law, institutions may not discriminate against individuals who refuse to perform abortions or provide a referral for one. The administration’s rule is intended to ensure that federal funds don’t flow to providers who violate those laws, Health and Human Services officials said.
"Doctors and other health care providers should not be forced to choose between good professional standing and violating their conscience," said HHS Secretary Mike Leavitt.
The rule requires recipients of federal funding to certify their compliance with laws protecting conscience rights.
Despite multiple laws on the books protecting health providers, the administration argued that the rule was needed "to raise awareness of federal conscience protections and provide for their enforcement."
But many groups described the rule as a last-minute push designed to make it harder for women to get services such as contraception or counseling in the event they are pregnant and want to learn all of their options. There have also been cases of physicians who refused to help lesbians conceive through artificial insemination because the doctors’ religious beliefs that homosexuality is sinful.
Several medical associations, more than 100 members of Congress, governors and 13 attorneys general were among the many thousands who wrote the department to protest the rule after it was proposed. Opponents didn’t like the rule any better after it was finalized.
"In just a matter of months, the Bush administration has undone three decades of federal protections for both medical professionals and their patients," said Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights. "It replaced them with a policy that seriously risks the health of millions of women, then tried to pass it off as benevolent."
Abortion opponents hailed the regulation because they said the lack of regulation had resulted in confusion and a lack of awareness.
"This is a huge victory for religious freedom and the First Amendment," said Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council.
The administration estimated the cost of complying with the rule at $43.6 million annually, which is spread throughout the hundreds of thousands of health providers subject to the rule — from hospitals and physician offices to medical schools and pharmacies.
Several lawmakers have promised to take up legislation that would overturn the rule once Congress reconvenes in January. Another option is for the Obama administration to issue new regulations that would trump it. The rule will take effect on Jan. 18, two days before Obama takes office.
Obama’s transition team did not specifically address the rule Dec. 18, but spokesman Nick Shapiro issued a statement that said Obama "will review all eleventh-hour regulations and will address them once he is president."
While campaigning in August, Obama criticized the proposal: "This proposed regulation complicates, rather than clarifies the law. It raises troubling issues about access to basic health care for women, particularly access to contraceptives," he said.
The 127-page rule disputed concerns that the protections being proposed were too broad and would affect too many workers in the health care industry, not just doctors or nurses involved with an abortion or sterilization.
"These laws are intended to protect the conscience rights of all individuals participating in health care services, and research programs and activities receiving certain federal funds, or that are administered by the department," the rule said.
Opponents consistently described the rule as a last-minute effort that would reduce access to health care services, particularly access to birth control.
"Making birth control more — not less — accessible is the best way to prevent unintended pregnancies and reduce abortion," said Rep. Nita Lowey, D-N.Y.
Others said the rule would go so far as to protect providers who refuse to give rape victims emergency contraceptives.
The Planned Parenthood Federation of America said about 200,000 people submitted comments opposing the rule, including about 90,000 comments from its supporters.
"This midnight regulation, issued in the last days of the Bush administration, undermines this country’s fragile health care system as well as patients’ access to health care information and services," said the group’s president, Cecile Richards.
Powered by Facebook Comments