Category: Conscience Protections

Posted on

NYS Vaccine Mandate for Healthcare Professionals

Updated 8/26/21 at 2030 – The reason for the lack of clarity had now been made clear. It seems that NYS never intended to allow for religious exemptions in the first place.

….

On August 16 Governor Cuomo issued a proclamation that all healthcare works in NYS will be mandated to be vaccinated no later than September 27th. With respect to exemptions to this mandate, the statement reads, “…a policy mandating employee vaccinations, with limited exceptions for those with religious or medical reasons.”

On August 23, the University of Rochester published their understanding of the mandate:

UR Medicine leadership participated in a call last week with New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) representatives to gain a better understanding of the COVID-19 vaccine mandate announced by Governor Andrew Cuomo last Monday. At this time, the Medical Center’s understanding is that the mandate will apply to everyone who works within a licensed health care facility. This means that all faculty, staff, and students who work or study in a patient care facility (inpatient, outpatient, and procedure areas) will be required to receive a first dose of the vaccine by the state’s September 27 deadline; testing is no longer an available option per NYSDOH. It also appears that the state will approve limited criteria for medical or religious exemptions. (emphasis added)

Unlike student exemptions (U of R’s exemption process is here, see below for their exemption form) it appears that it will be the New York State government itself that will be directly handling requests for exemptions. However, the process for such requests is unclear.

One thing we would like to make/keep clear is the official stance of the Catholic Church on this contentious issue. From the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith’s Note on the morality of using some anti-Covid-19 vaccines (promulgated 12/21/2020)

3...It must therefore be considered that, in such a case, all vaccinations recognized as clinically safe and effective can be used in good conscience with the certain knowledge that the use of such vaccines does not constitute formal cooperation with the abortion from which the cells used in production of the vaccines derive. It should be emphasized, however, that the morally licit use of these types of vaccines, in the particular conditions that make it so, does not in itself constitute a legitimation, even indirect, of the practice of abortion, and necessarily assumes the opposition to this practice by those who make use of these vaccines....
5. At the same time, practical reason makes evident that vaccination is not, as a rule, a moral obligation and that, therefore, it must be voluntary.

To be clear, the Finger Lakes Guild fully submits to the prudential judgement of the Church that the currently-available vaccines, while not ideal from a moral standpoint, are acceptable under the circumstances of this pandemic.

At the same time, the Guild also stands by those individuals who, as a matter of conscience, are unable to accept vaccination with any of the currently-available options due to the connection to abortion.

Finally, in accordance with paragraph 5 from the CDF’s Note, we oppose the Governor’s sweeping mandate that effectively makes vaccination non-voluntary for healthcare workers by forcing a choice between either violating their conscience or losing their job.

Please share any thoughts, questions, etc. with us here. We will do our best to stay abreast of this rapidly evolving policy from the Governor.

U of R Student COVID Vaccine Exemption FormDownload

Posted on

Conscience Protection in AK

The below letter was sent to Arkansas Governor, Asa Hutchinson, to thank him for signing the Medical Ethics and Diversity Act into law.

The letter was sent by CMA, in partnership with The Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, which represents more than 30,000 healthcare professionals committed to promoting and upholding Hippocratic medicine’s fundamental principles.

Together with these likeminded organizations, CMA remains dedicated to defending your rights to conscience and religious freedom and upholding the sanctity of life.
Governor Hutchinson, 
We write to you today to thank you for signing legislation providing protection of the conscience rights of medical professionals. We speak on behalf of the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists (AAPLOG), the Christian Medical and Dental Associations (CDMA), the Catholic Medical Association (CMA), and the American College of Pediatricians (ACPeds), together representing approximately 30,000 physicians across the United States. Our members are uniquely impacted by issues of conscience rights as we strive to offer compassionate and excellent healthcare to our patients – both born and preborn.

Fundamental to the unique physician-patient relationship is the concept of a fiduciary relationship – the trust that the patient has in his or her physician, to do and recommend what is in the best interest of the patient.  That trust stems from the centuries-old Hippocratic oath, a vow that all physicians take to do no harm to their patients. This Oath is the basis of the doctor-patient relationship, and is the cornerstone of medical ethics for all physicians. 

The Hippocratic oath and its promise to “do no harm” has been under attack for the better half of the past century through concerted attempts to use punitive legal coercion to force healthcare professionals to recommend or perform the killing of their patients. This coercion has resulted in a need for conscience protections for those physicians operating within the bounds of Hippocratic Medicine, which explicitly separates medical care from the intentional killing of human beings.  Hippocratic physicians must be able to exercise professional judgment for the best interest of all of their patients, born and preborn, without fear of negative career or legal implications as a result of their decisions. 

Opponents to conscience rights legislation may claim that current laws provide conscience protection, and that protections like those made into law in Arkansas are not necessary. But existing protections are hollow, as none of these statutes allow a physician who has been discriminated against to sue on their own behalf. All of the current conscience protection laws require the Department of Health and Human Services to sue on the behalf of the physician. It is anticipated then that under the Biden Administration, and HHS Secretary Becerra, physicians have little to no legal recourse against discrimination on the basis of acting according to the Hippocratic Oath and their conscience. 

We, as a coalition of medical associations, applaud the work of your office to protect the conscience   rights of medical practitioners, and hope that other state leaders will follow in the steps of Arkansas to ensure medical professionals operating in accordance with the Hippocratic oath remain able to do so. Medical professionals are more than a public utility and we should not be forced or bullied into performing procedures, treatments or therapies which kill our patients or leave them permanently injured. Additionally, physicians need to be able to legally defend themselves against such discrimination and bullying when we refuse to do so. 

AAPLOG, CMA, CMDA and the ACPeds, alongside our 30,000 members across the country, thank you and your fellow legislators for your leadership on the issue of conscience rights for medical professionals, and invite you to reach out to our organizations should you have any questions. 

Respectfully, 
The Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine
American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists American College of Pediatricians Catholic Medical Association Christian Medical and Dental Associations
Posted on

COVID-19 Vaccines

The Guild has been closely following the development, and now distribution, of vaccines for COVID-19. There has been much written on this topic and we are in particular very thankful to the USCCB for their recent guidance on this important topic.

We will be posting our detailed thoughts on all of this shortly. In the meantime, we would like to provide some resources that we hope will be helpful in thinking through this important issue.

If you have questions or would like more information please don’t hesitate to contact us.

Posted on

Conscience Protections Struck Down!

CMA Responds After Two Federal Judges Block Conscience Protection Rule 

Philadelphia, PA—The Catholic Medical Association is disappointed to learn two federal judges ruled to block The Department of Health and Human Services’ Conscience Protection Rule.

CMA previously expressed its support of HHS’ Conscience Rule, which aims to “protect healthcare providers, individuals, and other health care entities from having to provide, participate in, pay for, or refer for services which violate their conscience.”

“The protection of conscience is essential to the nature of every human life. It is furthermore a critical component of our role as health care workers. Without the freedom to exercise conscience, patients will no longer be able to trust in us never to abandon them,” said CMA President, Dr. John Schirger.

CMA believes the courts’ actions violate religious freedom and put the lives of patients at risk.

“The ruling is based in part on a lack of evidence of complaints about the rule. Conscience should be protected in principle and from the outset. It is unreasonable to require violations of conscience before conscience can be protected,” said Barbara Golder, M.D., J.D., Editor-in-Chief of CMA’s Linacre Quarterly.

Back in May of 2019, Co-Chair of CMA’s Ethics Committee, Dr. Marie Hilliard, warned of the importance of conscience rights when HHS initially shared its Conscience Rule.

“Without this protection, healthcare workers cannot be true advocates for our patients, especially if the best interest of the patient is being violated. As Catholic healthcare professionals, we never abandon patients even if it means we must transfer their care if they are requesting a procedure that violates their well-being or our professional integrity. Thus, this final rule is very protective of not only professionals but of the human beings served,” said Dr. Hilliard.

“The patient’s autonomy does not supersede the conscience of a physician. Therefore, the physician must be free to refuse to participate in immoral procedures, and free to refuse to refer to other providers who might be willing to perform such procedures,” said Dr. Lester Ruppersberger, OBGYN and Past President of CMA.

CMA is hopeful the courts will come to understand the need to protect the conscience rights of healthcare workers in the country and reverse their decisions.

“It must not be forgotten that when a health care professional refuses to perform procedures or recommend therapies based on a conscientious objection, they do so as not to violate or injure the physical, mental or spiritual health of their patients,” said Dr. Greg Burke, Co-Chair of CMA’s Ethics Committee.

###

The Catholic Medical Association is a national, physician-led community of over 2,300 healthcare professionals consisting of 109 local guilds. CMA mission is to inform, organize, and inspire its members, in steadfast fidelity to the teachings of the Catholic Church, to uphold the principles of the Catholic faith in the science and practice of medicine.

 

Jill Blumenfeld

Communications Manager

blumenfeld@cathmed.org