Senate Bill 90 allows doctors to act on their conscience, not discriminate

Last month, an article entitled “Bill Would Protect Doctors Who Deny Care Because It Violates Their Conscience” was published. The headline and article missed both what the bill does and doesn’t do.

The bill as written is clear and precise. The healthcare provider “shall have the right not to participate in or pay for any healthcare service which violates his or her conscience.”

The bill does not “deny care” rather, it allows caregivers to decline to provide certain treatments which in their “best medical judgment” may be harmful to their patients.

Remember the prime tenet of the Hippocratic Oath, “Do no harm.”

It is essential to note that nothing in the bill shall be construed to override the requirement to provide emergency treatment to anyone. It should be also be noted that this does not affect emergency services for victims of sexual offense. Furthermore, nothing in the bill allows the healthcare professional to discriminate. Discrimination in healthcare is both illegal and unethical.

The article also “missed” the explanation of the bill’s sponsor, Senator Steve Meredith, a former hospital administrator. He pointed out in committee testimony that, in light of the rapidly accelerating technology, healthcare providers need to be able to digest and then determine the ramifications of rapidly changing treatment modalities and whether their application is ethical.

To do so they must have the ability to deliver care according to their conscience and ethics, not finances or patient satisfaction surveys.

The committee testimony of two nurses and five doctors, of which I was one, also appears to have been missed in the article. Personal examples were cited of practitioners who were requested to violate their conscience by participating in procedures or administering drugs which they deemed unethical.

The profound concern for the patient was at the heart of all testimony given in favor of the bill in committee. In order to maintain healthcare provider trust, the patient must be confident in the belief that their provider is practicing out of the freedom to exercise their conscience in the best interest of the patient. The ethical practice of medicine cannot be exercised where freedom of conscience does not exist.

Ultimately this bill is for the benefit of patients. The patient is ensured that the treatment they receive is delivered by a healthcare practitioner who is enabled to serve them with the freedom of conscience to give patients the best care, not as dictated by any third party, such as the government, hospital corporation, regulatory agency, or insurance company, etc.

This bill ensures the essential trust between provider and patient by allowing the provider to, “First, do no harm.”

Jeffrey Parr is a Lexington physician.