Protection of Conscience Project News
Service, not Servitude
A wave of public debate over a bill that aims to support the conscience beliefs of medical professionals has the Peace River MLA who drew up the bill already making adjustments.
Speaking to a legislature standing committee, Dan Williams said he’d had numerous discussions since introducing Bill 207 on Nov. 7, prompting him to draft amendments to address concerns he was hearing. [Full text]
Calgary Herald
A pair of Calgary MLAs say they won’t support a controversial private-member’s bill meant to extend protection for physicians’ conscience rights.
Introduced in the legislature last week by Peace River MLA and UCP backbencher Dan Williams, Bill 207 would prevent patients from submitting a professional complaint or suing a health-care worker for failing to provide a service if medical staff objects to it. The bill would also add “conscientious beliefs” as grounds protected from discrimination in the Alberta Human Rights Act. . . [Full text]
CBC News
The Alberta UCP MLA behind a controversial bill on conscience rights for health care providers says the bill isn’t intended to cut access to services like abortion and medical assistance in dying as critics have charged.
“I feel there is some misinformation about what the bill is trying to do and what it does do,” Peace River MLA Dan Williams told reporters Friday.
“I want to be absolutely clear. This bill in no way categorically limits access to any services. That was not my intent, that is not what the bill does.” . . . [Full text]
Edmonton Journal
The premier won’t whip United Conservative Party MLA votes on a private members’ bill that could leave Alberta women without legal recourse if an objecting doctor refuses to refer her to a colleague for an abortion or contraception.
Alberta Premier Jason Kenney said at a Friday press conference his government will “always have free votes” on bills introduced to the legislature by individual MLAs, as compared to government bills. . . [Full text]
American Center for Law and Justice
You may have seen this past week headlines from a variety of news outlets loudly proclaiming the death of conscience rights: “Trump’s ‘conscience rule’ for health providers blocked by federal judge.” “Second federal judge strikes down Trump’s ‘conscience protection’ rule for health care providers.” Both the headlines and, for the most part, the stories themselves give the impression that, as usual, the independent federal judiciary has had to come to the rescue of all that is good and true by thwarting the latest attempt by “Trump” and his “religious right” henchpeople to impose their troglodyte, Taliban-esque views on Americans who just want to be treated in hospitals and doctors’ offices without interference from small-minded religious fanatics.
But it’s fake news. The decisions of the U.S. District Courts in New York and Washington addressed a set of administrative regulations – housekeeping stuff – adopted by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services earlier this year for how HHS wants to go about interpreting and enforcing pre-existing conscience protection laws. The laws themselves remain untouched and, as the New York court made clear, its decision leaves HHS at liberty to enforce existing conscience laws and to adopt rules governing how they go about doing that. . . [Full text]