Arkansas gov. signs law to protect the religious conscience of healthcare providers

The Christian Post

Emily Wood

Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson signed legislation Friday to provide conscience protections for the religious objections of healthcare providers, payers and institutions.

Sponsored by Sen. Kim Hammer and Rep. Brandt Smith, both Republicans, “The Medical Ethics and Diversity Act,” S.B. 289, will protect medical professionals from providing services that go against their moral, religious or ethical beliefs, such as performing abortions or sex-change surgeries.

Hutchinson said in a statement that he “weighed this bill very carefully” before signing. 

The governor originally opposed the legislation in the 2017 legislative session until it was changed to ensure the ability to exercise the right of conscience is limited to “conscience-based objections to a particular health care service.” . . . continue reading

New Mexico Senate passes medically assisted suicide bill

Associated Press

Cedar Attanasio

SANTA FE, N.M. (AP) — The New Mexico state Senate has passed a law that would remove criminal and civil liability for medical professionals who assist in the death of terminally ill patients who have chosen to end their life.

The Elizabeth Whitfield End-of-Life Options Act is named for a former New Mexico judge who testified in support for a right to die for the terminally ill in 2017. She died of cancer the following year. . . . continue reading

Arkansas House passes medical providers’ conscience bill

Northwest Arkansas Democrat Gazette

Rachel Herzog

A bill to allow healthcare workers, hospitals and insurance providers to decline to provide services that violate their conscience has passed in both chambers of the Arkansas Legislature.

Senate Bill 289 by Rep. Brandt Smith, R-Jonesboro, called the “Medical Ethics and Diversity Act,” allows providers to opt out of procedures they don’t agree with based on their religious or moral beliefs. . . continue reading

Is the Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 Vaccine Unethical?

Russell Moore

After half a million of our fellow Americans have died to the COVID-19 pandemic, the country seems almost right on the verge of hope. Vaccines were developed with record-setting speed, and have proven both safe and effective. After the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines have been on the field now for a while, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) just authorized a third—by pharmaceutical company Johnson & Johnson. This vaccine has made news—both in terms of the images of trucks headed for parcel distribution hubs for delivery and, less noticed, a denunciation from the Catholic Archdiocese of New Orleans, later joined by the Catholic bishops nationwide, arguing that Catholics, when possible, should take one of the first two vaccines but not the Johnson & Johnson version because, they argue, it is linked to cloned stem cells derived from abortions that took place decades ago. . .

Some have wondered, seeing these headlines, whether taking a COVID-19 vaccine would cause them to be involved, somehow, in abortion or embryonic stem-cell research or in any way the taking of a human life. . . continue reading

Joint Statement on Vaccines and Conscience Protection

News Release

Catholic Medical Association

Philadelphia, PA- March 2, 2021- It has been over a year since the first diagnosis of COVID-19 in the United States. Due to this pandemic’s effects, our society has experienced limitations in personal freedoms to a level we have never known. Social interactions and work environments have been changed by social distancing, masks, hospital and nursing home visitation restrictions and working from home. Freedom of movement about our communities and the nation has been limited by “stay-at-home orders” and mass travel restrictions. The availability of vaccines provides a sliver of hope but also raises many questions. Issues our society must address include prioritizing equitable vaccine distribution and the potential for coercive mandates on vaccine use

Government agencies and other organizations are responsible for developing strategies for efficient and equitable distribution of vaccines.

The highest priority is the vaccination of those at greatest medical risk and those directly involved in the care of the sick.  Once this has been accomplished, distribution can be directed toward those at lesser risk of serious disease.  Attention should also be given to making vaccines available to smaller independent hospitals and clinics serving in underserved and rural areas where the vaccines to date have been less available.  

Governing authorities must respect an individual’s right to accept or decline a vaccine.

There is no justifiable moral obligation to accept vaccination.  If a vaccine has been developed, tested, or produced with technology that an individual deems morally unacceptable, such as the use of abortion-derived fetal cell lines, vaccine refusal is morally acceptable. An individual’s decision to be vaccinated will also depend upon their personal assessment of the medical risks, a choice that should be respected. The decision not to be vaccinated must be accompanied by a commitment to take necessary precautions to lessen disease transmission.

Finally, the protection of First Amendment rights is imperative.

It is fundamental that the right of individual conscience be preserved. Coerced vaccination would irreparably harm Constitutional rights and the patient-physician relationship. Conscience is an individual belief influenced by many factors such as faith, culture, family, and reason. Each individual makes a conscientious decision in any given situation. Respect for conscience rights is always of primary importance.

The Covid-19 pandemic has challenged our nation for over a year. It has brought to light new challenges regarding disease management as well as threats to individual liberties. While the logistical challenges alone are significant, we must not ignore the ethical concerns regarding vaccine manufacturing, distribution and administration. While the pandemic remains a significant public health crisis, the individual rights of American citizens also remains of paramount importance. The guarantee of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” includes the right to make individual health care decisions while  taking into account our responsibility for the common good.

The organizations supporting this statement can be contacted through their websites:

American College of Pediatricians – acpeds.org

Catholic Medical Associations – cathmed.org

Christian Medical and Dental Association – cmda.org

National Association of Catholic Nurses, U.S.A. – nacn-usa.org