Transgender Woman Sues Hospital

[MacTheWolf (imported)]

A transgender woman is suing Seton Catholic Hospital is Daly City (San Francisco area), claiming medical officials blocked her from getting surgery because she had a sex change operation.

57 year old Charlene Hastings said she called Seton Medical Center to inquire about breast enlargement surgery, an offical told her it wasn't "in God's will for her to get that threatment."

I'm fracking retarded at posting links but here goes:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1948819/posts

[The Lurker (imported)]

While this offends me, I also understand that a private institution has the right to deny service for non emergency procedures that it believes are immoral.

There should be little debate here. The woman could easily have gone to a doctor/hospital that condones the surgery.

[plix (imported)]

As a private religious hospital, they have every right to deny this woman the surgery she is seeking. I am certain there are other hospitals that are willing to allow her to have the surgery. It would not be difficult for her to go to one of these other hospitals and allow this hospital the right to do what it believes is right.

[tugon (imported)]

If that is the only hospital where her doctor is currently paracticing and she has trust in him I can understand why she would be upset. Now if the hospital refused to do any breast augmentation for religious reasons I can understand but to just refuse a transgendered person I do think that is discrimination. If she has legal status as a female regardless of what she may have been in the past I think they should perform the surgery unless as I said they do not perform this procedure for any women.

[The Lurker (imported)]

Tugon-

Of course it is discrimination. And it is their right to do so. I'm not saying it is the correct thing to do, but the hospital has no obligation to service her needs. None.

[tugon (imported)]

Tugon-

Of course it is discrimination. And it is their right to do so. I'm not saying it is the correct thing to do, but the hospital has no obligation to service her needs. None.

Having been raised Catholic I am still waiting for that unconditional love and compassion to kick in during the decision making process.

[MacTheWolf (imported)]

As a private religious hospital, they have every right to deny this woman the surgery she is seeking. I am certain there are other hospitals that are willing to allow her to have the surgery. It would not be difficult for her to go to one of these other hospitals and allow this hospital the right to do what it believes is right.

If I was a ER physician, who happened to be a Jehovah's Witness, I could deny a patient a blood transfusion because, according to my faith, I know that procedure to be immoral. So I'd have to let the patient die.

Isn't it nice how physicians can use their religious beliefs to deny patients rights to life or happiness...hooray for religious doctors (satire).

[BossTamsin (imported)]

It may just be the way the article was worded, but it could almost be read as her specifically going out of her way to find someone with privileges at that religious hospital. As such the case changes tone, at least for me. No longer is it about her freedom, it's about her going out of her way to infringe upon the rights of others.

As for the hypothetical ER doctor, if you feel so strongly about your religion that you will not perform procedures such as that, I would expect you to either work at a religious hospital where that would be tacitly understood, or refrain from working in a place like the ER. If you choose to work at a secular hospital in the ER, you follow their rules. You can't have it both ways.

[JoaoGenerico (imported)]

The fact a business is private or religious don't grant them the right to discriminate. The right to deny someone service based on prejudice is not free speech neither free practice of someone's religiosity. It's just undue exercise of power.

[jemagirl (imported)]

Actually I know Charlene personally and I even happen to see her this very evening. I can't imagine that she went out of her way to find a hospital that would deny her request for surgery. What actually took place between her and the hospital is unknown to me as I did not want to pry but I would tend to think the article is poorly worded if it has given any one the impression that she was looking for a reason to sue.

For a lot of people it is not always possible to simply goto another hospital or clinic if they are on some sort of health plan or wish to use a doctor they have come to trust and rely on. The other issue is whether or not this should actually be considered elective surgery. Normally I would say breast augmentation is elective, but in the case of some one who is being treated for Gender Dysphoria or Body Dismorphia this may part of their prescribed treatment.

In San Francisco there are laws to insure that people are able to obtain medical treatment regardless of gender, but this incident took place in Daily City which is just to the south, so it's likely that the only laws that apply are State and federal.

Wertz thinks Seton's policy violates the Unruh Act, a state law that prohibits discrimination on the basis of gender, gender identity or sexual orientation. "There's simply no religious exemption in the Unruh Act," Wertz said.

I think she is within her rights to pursue this lawsuit and I support her completely.